SELECT COMMITTEE ON FICTITIOUS VOTES, IRELAND. 401 - A ' J for his farm ; his, the witness's, brother pays 30s. Irish for the same quality of E M Kelly Esq land, and lives well by it himself; is a pretty good valuator of land ; the appli- - L *' cant's land is as well worth 80$. an acre as his own; that is mearino- IT • 13 JULY 1838. knows a person that would give him that for it ; if it was left to the witness by his landlord wishing to make the highest penny he could of the land, and placing confidence in him, the witness, saying, " Now, Tracey, put the highest value you can fairly between man and man on this farm," he. the witness would say it was worth 30 s. an acre, but would not put more on it. Mr.' Julian submitted, on the evidence, this man had not the required value. 15059. Mr. Litton.'] At 305. an acre, what would have been the value?— He held 6 A. CZ R., subject to a pound an acre, so that he would have between three and four pounds profit. Mr. Gibson observed, " In that case, it is true the witness swears it is only worth 30 s. an acre, but the man himself swears it is worth 10 I. a year over his rent. I do not see why I should not believe him." Mr. Julian further said, he thought there was a well- grounded imputation of fraud cast on the whole case by the transaction detailed in evidence; it is sworn that Tracey, the applicant, and Ryan, met the day before the registry, and the applicant admits he had no idea of leaving the farm, and believes Ryan knew he had no intention of leaving it, and yet lie makes the applicant an offer to the precise amount that would give the applicant the franchise ; can anything be clearer than that this was a collusive and fraudulent mode of enabling the applicant to swear to the value. Mr. Gibson said if that was to form a ground of rejection, any honest man might be deprived of his franchise by a clever rogue coming and making him an offer the day before the registry. The objection was overruled, and the applicant admitted. 15060. Just give us the names of any other cases in which that principle was established?— At the same sessions, in April 1837, there were Martin Cane, Thomas Daly, Lawrence Daly, Daniel Egan, Thomas Guinan, and Daniel Moran. At the sessions of October 1837, there were John Cleary, James Don- nellan, Kiran Egan, Francis Feary, John Henney, Thomas Moran, Patrick and Bryan Manyon, William and Dennis Rigny, Joseph Ramsay, Thomas Claffy, Anthony Egan, Oliver Young, John L. Burgin and John Cusack. At the sessions of January 1838, there were James Coghlan; there are four Egans also, John, William, Thomas, senior, and Thomas, and Peter Claffy; those are the names of all the persons admitted subject to this objection. Martis, 17° die Julii, 1838. MEMBERS PRESENT. Mr. Curry. Mr. Hogg. Mr. Lefroy. Mr. O'Connell. Mr. M. J. O'Connell. Lord Granville Somerset. LORD GRANVILLE SOMERSET, IN THE CHAIR. 17 July 1838. Richard Daly, Esq. Barrister at Law, called in; and Examined. 15061. Mr. O" Connelly I BELIEVE you are a barrister at the Irish bar?— Richard Daly Esq. I am. 1 5062. Are you of six years standing?— I am often. . 15063. Have you been connected with the King's County registry?—! have. 15064. When did you first commence ?— About October 1832. 15065. At the time of the first registry under the Reform Act r— At the time of the general registration under the Reform Act. 15066. For whom were you counsel ?— I was counsel for Mr. Fitzsimon and what is called the Liberal party in that county. 15067. And generally for the Liberal party .'— Generally for the Liberal Pa64y3. 3 f 15068. Who 1