SELECT COMMITTEE ON FICTITIOUS VOTES, IRELAND. 69 Yj 7985. In January session 1833, he was rejected?— He was. 7986. Did he appear again before the registering barrister?— He did, in January 183/. 7987. Did he appear upon the same document?— He did; " Michael Mulfall produced an old lease, quite worn, which he says was dated March 179/." 7988. Were you present at the sessions at which he had been rejected, and also at the session at which he was admitted ?— I was. 7989. You had then an opportunity of seeing the sort of document that he produced upon both occasions ?— I had. 7990. Can you state that it was the same document that he produced upon both occasions ?— It was : " he produced an old lease, quite worn out, which he says was dated in March 1797, from three lessors; both the witnesses to the lease are dead ; but he pays rent under the lease, he says, for 30 years." 7991. Were the names of the witnesses discernible 011 the face of the docu- ment ?— It appears that the lease was not at all legible. 7992. Then what you are now stating is his own account of the contents of the instrument ?— It is ; he says " he saw the lease executed ; that it was for his own life ; he saw it signed by three landlords; it was made to his father, who left it by will to him ; his brothers got their portions. Court was satisfied as to the quantity and value." 7993. Without any further evidence than his own examination ?— Yes. 7994. Mr. French.] Did he produce the will?— No. 7995. You state positively that he did not?— I do. 7996. Mr. Lefroy.] If he had produced the will, should you have had a note of it ?— I should ; I have a note of the substance of all the evidence, particularly every document. 7997. Mr. French.] You stated that the court was satisfied as to the quantity of land and its value ; now that seems as if it was a kind of special decision of the court, as if he was not exactly satisfied with the tenure ?— He appeared, from the man's possession of 30 years, to hold his tenure as a title. 7998. Mr. Beamish.] That was not disputed by any of your party?— No, we had no means of disproving his title. 7999. Mr. Lefroy.] Was there any evidence given with respect to the length of his possession, but what appeared from his own oath ?— No, there was not. 8000. Was there any other case of the same kind ?— There was a case just similar, in October 1836 : " Hugh Dooner produced an old, pasted- up lease, from Mr. Bradshaw and Mr. Macauley; does not remember its date, but is 20 years in possession; pays 5/. 18s. b d. half- yearly, for 14 years; the lease was made to his father, who made a will in his favour. Court takes his possession as evidence." 8001. Did he produce the will ?— No. 8002. Mr. Beamish.] Was he asked for it ?— I do not think he was pressed to produce it; he stated that he derived his title by will from his father. 8003. Was he asked to produce the will to prove it?— I think not. 8004. Mr. Lefroy.] Did it appear, from the face of that document, who the lessors were, or the rent or the land or the term ?— I think not; I think there were none of those; he states the lessors to have been Mr. Bradshaw and Mr. Macauley. 8005. Does it appear from your note whether that statement with respect to the lessors was from the document or from his parol account of it ?— My note states that he produced an old pasted up lease, which he says is from Mr. Bradshaw and Mr. Macauley. This case and the case of John Dooner, were rejected at the Reform sessions, and they appealed to the ensuing assizes. I do not know whether they prosecuted the appeals, but it appears that they were not admitted. 8006. Then they either abandoned the appeal, or were defeated upon it ?— Just so. 8007. And from 1833 to 1836 they did not come forward, but in October 1836 they came forward and were admitted ?— Yes; the case of Hugh Dooner was in October, and at the January following his father, John Dooner. 8008. Have you any other case of the same description ?— In January 1837, James M'Cormack, of Ballyglassan, produced a deed, dated 1st November 1835, from Patrick M'Cormack, his father, of 12 acres, rent 16 I. Admits that he produced the lease the 2d of January, but had it then only a few days; says Mr. G. Gardiner, 30 March 1838. 64 K 3