/ r / S E L E C T C O M M I T T E E O N F I C T I T I O U S V O T E S , I R E L A N D . 3 9 1 ' / ° 14928. And relieve him of 10/. by reason of the rent payable out of the John Julian other house ?— Yes. 1 y 1 01 me John Juhan> Esq. 14929 If the other house had been empty you could not relieve him in that iT^ Ts^. way ?— No, not in that way, but if it were 20/. a year, and was in his own pos- session, it would be sufficient. 1 14930. If it was not in his own occupation you could not relieve him at all? — In any case I would relieve him if it was worth 20 /. a year. 14931. Your opinion is, that the assistant barrister should apportion the rent and charges between the part in the occupation of the applicant and the part he has let, but that he must not give credit to the applicant for the entire amount of the rent he gets out of the part let ?— Yes, that is my view. 14932. Although the rent should be punctually paid ?— That makes no dif- ference. It is very difficult to apportion in many cases. 14933- There would be no difficulty in giving a man credit for what he re- ceives ?— That depends upon the man taking the oath. 14934. It depends upon the construction he puts upon the oath?— Yes. 1493.5- Mr. Lefroy. Have you referred to the first clause of the Reform Act ?— No, I have not. 14936. Is there not an express proviso that a party shall not be entitled to vote unless he shall be in the actual occupation of the premises, the premises being what is antecedently described as held under lease or the assignment of a lease ?— There is. I think the principle I have mentioned is a liberal one ; my own private opinion is in favour of a liberal construction of the statute, but I think that is the most liberal. 14937. Mr. O'Connell.'] If the oath is stringent it admits of no liberality?— I think the arguments on both sides are very strong. 14938. The question is, what is the meaning of " premises ;" it is one of the puzzles which the Reform Act has left us ?— It is a puzzle; but I think the principle I have mentioned is a liberal one in the construction of the statute, and such a one as a person may take the oath consistently with it, because, considering the part they are in possession of freehold, they may, in the case you put, have an interest over and above the rent and charges of 10 /. a year. 14939. Chairman.'] If I understand you right, your doctrine is this : that in all cases of a party subletting a portion of his holding, you make the value liable to the deduction, both on account of the part he occupies and a* so the part he lets to a subtenant; that is your doctrine ?— That is the general prin- ciple adopted by the assistant barristers; and without wishing to give an opinion upon a matter of law, I rather think, in a liberal construction of the statute, they might adopt it. 14940. Mr. O'Connell By your construction, the entire value of the part demised would not be given credit for, though it was paid in rent ?— It would not. 14941. There would be a portion of the rent which would be a perfect waste for the purposes of the register ?— Yes, quite useless, certainly, so far as regards the purposes of the registry. 14942. Can you speak to the general accuracy of Mr. Kelly's reports?— I have perused all he was required to take by the Conservative Society, and I conceive them well and accurately taken. 14943. Were you present when those cases were discussing, of which he took notes ?— I was present at all the registry courts where he took notes by di- rection of the Conservative Society, 14944. How soon after he took those notes did you peruse them .-— Generally immediately after the quarter sessions for the particular town were over; my engagements were such as to prevent me doing it earlier. 14945. Mr. O'Connell.'] Did the Conservative Society examine the persons whom they produced to prove title and value of property before they produced them, or leave that to you ?— They generally ascertained themselves ; the per- sons who furnished me with information examined, to know what the witnesses could prove. 14946. Do you mean in opposition, or in support ?— There was never a wit- ness examined by the Conservative Society in support of a claim. 14947. They were all registered upon the evidence of the applicants them- selves ?— Yes, registered or rejected upon the evidence of the applicant. 643. 3 D 4 ,4948- 6