\ 34 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE T. Courtenay, Esq. 7151. How many days was he there ?— I think he was a month. 7152. Has he furnished any account of his demand ?— He has. • 27 March 1838. 7153. What js the amount of it; what does he charge ?— I am to pay him two guineas a day, and travelling expenses. 7154. Who is to repay you?— The candidates. 7155. Will you name those that are to repay you ?— Mr. Fox and Mr. Lefroy. 7156. Are you really to get money from Mr. Fox ?— I look to him. 7157. Is Mr. Fox to pay you ?— He is. 7158. Out of his own pocket ?— Yes. 7159. Chairman.] Mr. Sherrard was employed by the defeated candidates at the last Longford election, to value the qualifications of certain parties, whose qualifi- cations were impugned by those defeated candidates ?— He was. 7160. And to give evidence before the Election Committee of this House?— Yes. 7161. But in consequence of that Committee refusing to enter into the question of qualification or no qualification, he never was examined?— He never was examined in consequence. 7162. And you, 011 the part of those two individuals, expect to have to pay him as you would have to pay any other person who might, be employed for any other purpose, upon the general principle that valuators are to be paid for their labour?— Upon the general principle, that he is entitled to be paid for his time and labour. 7163. And upon the same principle upon which other valuators would be paid if called upon for that purpose ?— Precisely. 7164. Mr. O'Connell.] Mr. Sherrard has never made any survey till preparatory to the last petition ?— No. 7165. You have not employed him upon any former occasion?— No. 7166. Chairman.] Were there any valuators employed upon the other side of the question ?— I do not know that there were any professional valuators, but there were valuators out. 7167. Were there any valuators brought forward to support the value of the voters impugned before the Committee last year ?— There were on both sides. I11 some cases there were three witnesses examined on each side. 7168. Mr. Lefroy.] Was your reason for employing Mr. Sherrard, that lie was the most eminent man in Ireland for experience and character as a valuator of lands, and as having no connexion whatever with the county?— We conceived it to be the first house in Ireland, and it was in consequence of that that we employed him. 7169. And having no connexion with that county which might tend to give a partiality to his judgment?— No connexion whatever: I believe it was his first appearance there. 7170. But he had been in the habit of valuing lands in various parts of Ireland ?— That is his business. 7171. And he had been employed particularly as a tithe valuator by the Govern- ment ?— Yes, 7172. Mr. O'Connell.'] Where was he employed by the Government as a tithe valuator ?— I think in the county of Dublin and the county of Louth, but I will not state positively as to that; but he showed me his book of calculations which he had made, in which lie said the Government was satisfied with his returns, and the landowners as well. 7173. Is it your experience that the tithe valuators valued the land to the full value ?— In any instance where their valuations have come under my notice, I think they did. 7174. Do you metin to say that they valued to the full value that a solvent tenant would pay ?— I think they did put 011 the actual value. 7175. Such a value as you conceive ought to be put for the franchise ? They may not have gone to the outside stretch, and perhaps did not, but as far as their returns came under my notice, I think they put on the full value. 7176. But not such a value as you put for the franchise ?— They may not have put down the real rent, but they took the same estimate I think as I do! 7177. For the franchise r — For the franchise. 7178. Then, according to you, the tithe valuators valued to the extreme value taken at rack- rent?— I do not think they took it at the rack- rent, but when their values have come under my notice, so far as asking them questions upon it and hearing O