SELECT COMMITTEE ON FICTITIOUS VOTES, IRELAND. > 2.5 2 I. 5 s. an acre." Then Thomas Farrell was called upon by the court, a neigh- Mr- G. Gardiner. hour of his in the same townland ; he was examined by the court, " Could not — tell what relative he was to the claimant, but says to Mr. Reynolds, the solicitor, 28 March that to any man in need of the land, it was worth 44 s. 6 d. ; says he pays 35 s. himself for land that was as good. Admitted, with doubt of value." 7627. Was there any evidence as to the value adduced in 1835, which was not adduced in 1836 ?— No ; but there was additional evidence in support of the claim in 1836. 7628. Mr. Lefroy. Would the valuation of Farrell have made it out 10 I. ?— It would have exactly given him 10/. 5 s. 7629. Mr. O'Connell.] His own would have given him 10/. 10 s. 1— Exactly. 7630. And his witness's gave him 10 Z. 5 s. ?— Yes. 7631. Mr. Lefroy.] In October 1836, what did he swear it to be worth ?— In October 1836 he stated that his father held the land before the present lease at 3/ s. 6 d.. and immediately the barrister rejected him; he said, from its size and the rent, it was too small for a freehold; I recollect that circumstance very well. 7632. He rejected him in April 1835, saying at once that it was too small to give a qualification at the rent lie put upon it ?— Just so. 7633. Mr. O'Connell.] It does not appear that lie was asked any more ques- tions ?— No, it does not. 7634. But that he was rejected the moment lie stated that his father paid 1/. 17*. Gd. ?— Yes. 7635. Did he say anything more of the value at that time ?— I do not recollect that he did. 7636. If he did say anything more of the value, would not it have been your duty to have taken it down ?— It would. 7637. And you probably would have done it?— I think I would. 7638. Mr. Lefroy.] Did lie state anything in October 1836 as to any alteration or improvement of the farm that had taken place, so as to make it of a higher value than the value he had put upon it in his former examination .- — He states that he did not. 7639. Mr. O'ConnelL] Was any evidence offered against him in 1836 ? — No." 7640. Had you, in October 1836, any witnesses 011 your side to disprove value ?— In some cases. 7641. Chairman.] Upon what valuation does this man pay his tithe ?— I do not recollect the exact sum, but I think his composition is about Is. Ad. or Is. 5( 7. an acre. We classed the land, and the highest class was Is. 8d.; we class the land in three different qualities. 7642. Mr. O'Connell.] What was the lowest class ?— The lowest class was about 6( L, the second class was about Is., and the highest 1A\ 8d.; and the average of this man's holding was formed from putting the classes together. 7643. Have you any other profession or trade beside surveying?'— Yes, I superintend a school. 7644. You are a schoolmaster?— Yes. 7645. Have you anything else ?— No. 7646. You are not clerk 01* sexton, or anything of that sort ?— No. 7647. Mr. Curry.] You attended the tithe commissioner in 1834 ?— Yes. 7648. In what character ?— I assisted him as a surveyor; I had the manage- ment of the surveying of two parishes ; I had another person employed with me. Whenever the leases were not produced to the commissioner we used to survey the holdings, and assist in dividing them in different classes. 7649. Did you assist the commissioner in estimating the value of the different classes ?— All through. 7650. In the autumn of 1834 you saw this man's farm?— That was the time we valued it for that purpose. 7651. Can you state particularly what number of acres, of each particular kind of crop he had upon his farm ?— Lie had but a small portion of it tilled. 7652. About how much ?— About three acres. 7653. What was that three acres ?— Oats and potatoes. 76/ 5A. How much oats ?— About two acres of oats. • H 3 And