Last Chance to Read
 
 
 
 
You are here:  Home    Fictitious Votes, Ireland

Third Report from the Select Committee on Fictitious Votes, Ireland

30/07/1838

Printer / Publisher:  
Volume Number:     Issue Number: 
No Pages: 1
 
 
Price for this document  
Third Report from the Select Committee on Fictitious Votes, Ireland
Per page: £1.00
Whole document: £1.00
Purchase Options
Sorry this document is currently unavailable for purchase.

Third Report from the Select Committee on Fictitious Votes, Ireland

Date of Article: 30/07/1838
Printer / Publisher:  
Address: 
Volume Number:     Issue Number: 
No Pages: 1
Sourced from Dealer? No
Additional information:

Full (unformatted) newspaper text

The following text is a digital copy of this issue in its entirety, but it may not be readable and does not contain any formatting. To view the original copy of this newspaper you can carry out some searches for text within it (to view snapshot images of the original edition) and you can then purchase a page or the whole document using the 'Purchase Options' box above.

SELECT COMMITTEE ON FICTITIOUS VOTES, IRELAND. • A J 411 5 15249. Is that your opinion now ?— No; because the majority of the assistant Richard Daly, Esq. barristers, and, m fact, I may say all the assistant barristers have decided con- — trary to that view. i7 juiy ^ 38. 15250. But, independent of authority, is your own construction of that clause that it does not require six months' possession under the instrument ? I ream- consider that that construction may be raised. 15251. Is that your opinion?— I would not register according to that view if I were a registering barrister. 15252. And that is not your own opinion, as a barrister, upon the sound con- struction of that clause ?— I should say not now. 15253. Do you believe then that Mr. Pennefather gave that opinion ?— I speak now as to a period of five years past; it was my impression at that time that it was his opinion ; it may be an erroneous one, and very likely it is. 15254- Do you mean your impression may be erroneous or Mr. Pennefather's opinion ?— I mean my impression may be erroneous. 15255- But you believe that he did give that opinion?— It struck me as such. 15256. Do you believe now that he gave that opinion ?— I cannot form a mat- ter of belief upon it. 15257. Mr. O'Connell The section is, " That no person shall be so registered in respect of any lands, tenements, or hereditaments, unless he has been in the actual possession thereof, or in receipt of the rents, issues, and profits thereof, for his own use, as the case may require, for six calendar months next previous to his registry under this Act; provided always, that when any lands, tenements, 01* hereditaments, which should otherwise entitle the owner, holder, or possessor thereof to vote in any such election, shall come to any person, at any time within six months next before such registry, by descent, succession, marriage, settlement, devise, or promotion to any benefice or office, such person shall be entitled in respect thereof to be registered as a voter at the registry for such county, city, town, and borough respectively, then next to be had by virtue of this Act:" does that refer the possession to the lease or instrument ?— It abridges the possession; but there is no reference on the face of the section to the deed, lease, or instrument. 15258. Mr. Lefroy Did you ever know a proviso have any effect, except that of taking out of the clause that which, but for the proviso, would have been in it 1— As to possession of the land, tenements, and hereditaments, un doubtedly ; because, under the proviso, a man who came in by virtue of descent might register to- morrow. 15259. But does not the latter part of that proviso distinctly show the pos- session must have been a possession under the instrument ?— Clearly not, in my humble judgment. 15260. Then what was the use of the proviso ?— To shorten the possession. With regard to voters in borough towns, that proviso is as much referential to them, where there is no lease at all, as it is to the electors of the county ; I press in that circumstance as an illustration by way of analogy. 15261. You took notes at the registries which you attended ?— I took notes at the registry of the 25th of October 1836 ; and I find, by comparing the notes mentioned in the slip I hold in my hand, with the registry lists as furnished to me by the clerk of the peace, I took a short note at the registry of April 1836, but on no other occasion did 1 take notes of any importance, inasmuch as I was so busy in attending to the examination and cross- examination of the claimants that I had no time; and the reason I took notes at the sessions of October 1836 was, that Mr. Costello attended on that occasion, and he gave me plenty of idle time to make those minutes. 15262. Mr. O'Connell He did the business himself? principally himself. 15261 Mr. Lefroy.~\ That paper you produced with the three cases is part of those notes ?- It is the note taken on the 2d April 1836, at the time that Mr. Battersby attended. , AT 15264. Have you any objection to produce the rest of those notes r— Not the smallest.— [ The same were delivered in.] 115265. Do those papers you have now handed in contain all the notes you took at that time ?— They contain, as far as I recollect, all the notes 1 took at that time. rc. v , 643. 3 g 2 ! 5266. You - He did the business
Ask a Question

We would love to hear from you regarding any questions or suggestions you may have about the website.

To do so click the go button below to visit our contact page - thanks