353 M I N U T E S OF E V I D E N C E T A K E N B E F O R E T I IE E. M. Kelly, Esq. charger, and the person opposing that claim was refused the right of examining him whether it was a bond fide rentcliarge or got up for the purpose of the u July 1838. register, it would be depriving the party of an advantage he is fairly en- titled to. i 14077. Mr. O'Connell.] Are you not aware that many barristers holding Conservative principles maintain that opinion ?— I am not aware of the fact, but that would not alter my opinion, it is shutting the door upon fraud. 141) 78. Mr. Lefroy.] Would not this practice enable a tenant from year to year in the possession of land, to make leases for such a term as would qualify the lessee to register; would not the practice of shutting evidence out by cross- examination, enable every man in the occupation of land to make a lease of a part of the land and put another in possession of it to qualify him ?— Yes, I think it would have that effect if the possession were transferred. 14970. So that a man who had merely possession as yearly tenant, making him competent to give possession could, by the possession of 20 acres, make as many voters as the land would allow ?— Yes, if that evidence was shut out, but there is a possibility of showing it aliunde videlieit; by the intervention of the owner of the estate he could show that the person who made the lease was only tenant from year to year. 1* 4980. But the owner of the estate is not bound to attend ?— No, nor is known to the parties opposing the claim; he may be in some instances known from local circumstances, but in the majority of cases he is not. 14981. And the Reform Act provides 110 mode in which you can find him out ?— No, it does not. 14982. Mr. O'Connell.] The townland is specified in the notice?— Yes, or other denomination; it is sometimes merely the general name, not specified in the townland. 14983. It gives the denomination of the place?— Yes, the general denomi- nation. 14984. There can be no difficulty in ascertaining whose estate it is?— Yes, a great deal of difficulty, the time is short. 14985. What is the time?— Twenty days, and in many instances it could not be done at all where the landlord is adverse. 14986. By adverse you mean supporting the claim?— Yes. 14987. No man can register that is not six months in possession?— No, he must be six months in possession. 14988. Then he must be also in possession at the time of the election?— He must be in possession at the time of the election. 14989. He is bound to swear there he has been continuously in such pos- session ; that is, franchise continuous ?— That his right continues; he is bound to swear that the same qualification continues. 14990. Which consists of two things, title and possession; the possession is part of the qualification ?— Certainly. 14991. And therefore you have his oath as to the possession in the first instance, and, if required, his oath as to the continuance of the same qualifi- cation at the election ; is that so ?— That is so. 14992. So that the fraud contemplated by the Right Honourable Gentleman in his question, is a fraud perpetrated by persons in possession ?— I should think it must be always done by persons in possession ; they must have possession to sustain, but it is possible for them, by nothing more than mere possession, to effect the end. M993- Mr. Gibson has never refused to allow adverse proof of the landlord's possession ?— I never knew adverse proof offered. 14994. And therefore never knew it rejected ?— No. M995- How long have you been called to the bar ?— More than five years. 14996. Did you report for the public press at the time ?— No ; I sent some half dozen cases to the Evening Packet, which struck me as being very striking cases, but I never reported in any other respect that I know of. 14997. You mean you reported for the local Registry Association?— Yes. 14998. The Conservatives?— Yes. 149|; 99- You are quite aware that it is not necessary for any applicant to make proof of the landlord's title ?— I think it is necessary to establish his claim to vote. 15000. He