SELECT COMMITTEE ON FICTITIOUS VOTES, IRELAND. 4,> 9 W' 2**** that fse;-" James Crowe, lease burned before Christmas; Richard Daly, Esq. child set the house on fire, the lease was m his possession, made by Mr Murphy - of Dublin rent 21. 4s Qcl; 18 A. 3 R. 33 P. ;" ( that was the quantity of the » 7 July 1838, land); lease made about 17 years ago; the farm worth to him twice 10/ a year ; lease for three lives, or 31 years." 15130. By " worth twice 10/. a year" you mean over and above the rent?— Yes, that was the meaning of the witness or claimant. " Cross- examined Land lord was a good man; told the landlord he was coming to register; landlord said he would give him another lease free," ( that was free of costs ) " He might give him one ; the court said it is quite evident he is an honest man • I rei? ct him because the landlord might give him a new lease." That is the reason assigned. 15131. That note is a short abstract of the evidence ?— Yes, taken on the spot by me as counsel. 15132. And of course is not a full statement of all the particulars ?— Certainly not; it does not embrace all the minutiae. 15133. He was rejected?— He was rejected, because the landlord might give him a new lease. 15134. Or produce the counterpart ?— That he might give him a new lease was the principle laid down; and I take the liberty to make this further remark : that in a sessions or two after that he did produce a new lease, and he was then registered. 15135- It is stated that Mr. William Murphy produced the lease; is that Mr. Murphy, of Smitlifield?— It was Mr. William Murphy of Kennedy's- lane. 15136. What was the next case at that sessions?— John Corcoran. 15137. Have you a note of that?— I have. 15138. Is it an abstract of the evidence r— It is an abstract of the evidence taken at that time. 15139. The short heads of it taken by yourself?— Yes. 15140. State that case ?—" John Corcoran lost his lease about 12 years ago, it being left in the hands of Peter Rigney, his partner; applied to Peter Rigney lately, who told him it was lost. Cross- examined : Did not ask the landlord for his part." The court rejected him. 15141. Was there a third case?— There was the case of William Daly. 15142. What session was that ?— The same session. 15143. State the case?—" William Daly made a demand of his lease from Mr. Mullock, who would not give it to him ; 13 years in possession; would not give it ( the land) for 25/. a year profit. Cross- examined: Never read the lease nor signed it; it was made to his father; he died 15 years ago. Father made no will; he is not the eldest son. Lease made about 20 years ago ; re- jected for want of title." That does not bear altogether upon the general principle; but the case of Crowe is one of many cases with respect to which Mr. Gibson undoubtedly resorted to very strict proof to account for the exis- tence of the lease, and the non- production, before he would admit secondary evidence of the contents. 15144. Now, as to the six months' possession, what principle did Mr. Gibson adopt with respect to the party being six months in possession prior to his registration?— Mr. Gibson, in the majority of cases that came before him, always required that the lease should be contemporaneous with the possession; that the possession should be at least six months. 15145. What do you mean by saying, " in the majority of cases always" ? — What I mean by the majority " of cases is this : where there was evidence of an equitable agreement antecedent to the execution of the lease, then he grafted the lease upon that equitable agreement, and if the agreement and term covered the six months he registered the man. 15146. Then am I to understand you to say distinctly that Mr. Gibson never registered a man for a six months' possession, unless that six months was under the instrument he produced at the registry, or under an equitable agreement for such an instrument ?— Precisely, that equitable agreement being written or parol; I have two cases that bear upon that proposition. 15 « 47- At what session did that occur ?— At the session of October 1836, the session I have already alluded to. One of the cases was the Kinnarney: " He was seised from the 4th June 1836; 33 in possession 643. 3 F 3 case of Michael 8 1. rent;