ON PETITIONS RELATING TO LIMERICK TAXATION. 61. When is the other charter day ?— The second charter day is the second Monday after the 29th day of September, for the appointment of charter justices. If a claimant petitions in June or July, how long will he be kept before his claim is taken into consideration ?— If he petiiions in July, I would think the next council that meets. In October?— Yes, or sooner; the next council that meets is eligible to entertain the report of the committee, in my judgment. When a claimant puts in his claim to be admitted a freeman or otherwise of the city, what is the usual course of proceeding upon the part of the corporation ?— The usual course adopted latterly, was to refer them to the committee of the corporation appointed by the corporation 011 a certain day; which 1 can point out if the Com- mittee wish. Turn to it ?—• [ The witness referred to it.~\ The 8th of November 182 1, that was the last day the committee sat. When was the first committee appointed ?— In the old books. That was the usual custom ?— Yes, to refer them to the committee of council, appointed to investigate it. And that is now continued?— Yes. When do you state that the last committee for that purpose sat ?— [ The witness referred to a paper.] The 8th of November, I believe, to be the last day the committee sat; I have the minutes here that were taken. Is there not a committee of accounts, who audit the chamberlain's accounts once a year, and by whom every bill must be approved, before it can be paid ?—" Cer- tainly that is the usage; they are first audited by the committee, and afterwards ratified by a resolution of council, approving of and ordering them to be paid, before the order can be issued. They are first audited by the committee, and then ratified by the council ?— Yes. Before they become payable?— Yes, and that order of the council is my authority for issuing the order. You stated, that there was a committee of accounts, and you gave the names of them ; were they chosen in the usual manner?— Yes. You state, that the corporation paid two thousand and some odd pounds in defence of actions?— Yes, I believe they did. Were they not, or did they not, by their resolution, at the voting of the money, declare themselves to be defending the antient usages and rights of the corporation ? — Yes. Were the body, who so voted that sum from the corporation revenues, authorized to expend that money?— I believe so. The resolution, declaring the money payable, is signed at the head by Mr. Gabbit?— Yes. Is he any relation of Lord Limerick's ?— I have heard, and believe he is connected by marriage. Is he any relation of Lord Gort's?— No, not that I know of. He was mayor the year that the resolution was passed ?— Yes; he was twice mayor; I think he was mayor in the year 1819, and in 1820. There was a committee appointed, for the purpose of ascertaining the value of some land in J 817, which was afterwards rented to Lord Gort ?— Yes. Was that committee named according to the usages of the corporation ?— Yes, so far as came within my observance; I never saw it otherwise. You state, that the rent agreed upon in October 1819, was 67/. os. 3</.?— Yes. And that the resolution, granting those lands at this rent to Lord Gort, was signed by several members of the common council ?— Yes, it was. Was Mr. Joseph Gabbit's name signed to it?— Yes. You state, that you never recollect any account, rendered by the chamberlain to the common council, of the receipts and revenues of the corporation ?— Never, in my presence. Do you ever remember the common council calling for such documents?— Never. 617. Q Do