ON THE LOCAL TAXATION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN. 213 IS NOT SMITHFIELD A BROAD STREET, WHERE THE HAY AND STRAW IS SOLD IN DUBLIN?— IT IS, AND CATTLE. WAS THERE ANY EXPENSE GONE TO BY THE CORPORATION OF DUBLIN, IN PROVIDING SMITH- FIELD AS A HAY AND STRAW MARKET?— YES; THE CORPORATION MADE A LEASE TO A MAN OF THE NAME OF HENRY ELLIS, OF A VERY LARGE AND VALUABLE TRACT OF GROUND, FOR 200 YEARS, ON THE CONDITION THAT HE SHOULD PURCHASE UP ANOTHER LEASE THAT WAS HELD BY AN INDI- VIDUAL WHO HAD A TIME TO RUN OF IT, OF PART OF THE GROUND ON WHICH SMITHFIELD MARKET NOW STANDS; THAT HE SHOULD OPEN AND PREPARE THAT MARKET, AND PAVE IT FOR A PUBLIC MARKET, AND BUILD THE QUAYS, BRIDGES, AND SO FORTH, LEADING TO IT. DID THEY IN CONSEQUENCE OF THAT, MAKE PURCHASES TO A CONSIDERABLE EXPENSE, OR NOT, IN ORDER TO ENLARGE SMITHFIELD ?— THE PROPERTY WHICH HAS NOW DESCENDED TO LORD CLIFDEN FROM MR. ELLIS, IS WORTH EIGHT OR 10,000/. A YEAR. DID THE CORPORATION GO TO ANY CONSIDERABLE EXPENSE, OR NOT, IN PURCHASING THE PROPERTY TO CLEAR AWAY, SO AS TO MAKE THE SMITHFIELD ?— THEY WENT TO NO EXPENSE ; MR. ELLIS WENT TO THE EXPENSE, AND THEY GAVE HIM A LEASE FOR A CERTAIN PERIOD AS REMUNERATION. WHAT IS THE TERM?— 200 YEARS ; IT WILL EXPIRE IN 1876. DID THE CORPORATION, IN THE PEFORMANCE OF THE DUTIES IMPOSED ON THEM BY CHARTER, BUILD ANY BRIDGES?— NOT AT THAT TIME; BUT THEY MADE A CONDITION, THAT MR. ELLIS WAS TO BUILD TWO BRIDGES, WHICH HE DID IN CONSEQUENCE OF IT, AND MADE THE QUAY. IS THE COMMITTEE THEN TO UNDERSTAND, THAT MR. ELLIS, THE LESSEE OF THE CORPORATION OF DUBLIN, DID, IN CONSEQUENCE OF THE BENEFICIAL LEASE MADE TO HIM BY THE CORPO- RATION, EXECUTE THOSE DUTIES FOR THE CORPORATION THAT THEY WERE BOUND BY CHARTER TO EXECUTE?— HE DID ALL THOSE WHICH CONCERNED THE ESTABLISHMENT OF SMITHFIELD- MARKET. SO FAR AS SMITHFIELD IS CONCERNED ?— YES, IT IS SO STATED IN THE BODY OF THE LEASE. DOES THE PAVING BOARD CONTINUE TO DEMAND FROM THE CORPORATION OF DUBLIN, THIS COMPOSITION OF 2,200/. A YEAR?— YES, THE PAVING BOARD HAVE FILED A BILL IN CHAN- CERY NOW. HAS THE CORPORATION OF DUBLIN EVER MADE ANY REPRESENTATION TO THE PAVING BOARD, THAT THE CORPORATION ARE DEPRIVED OF THE SOURCE FROM WHENCE THAT 2,200/. A YEAR WAS TO BE PAID ?— I WENT PERSONALLY TO THE PAVING BOARD, AT THE REQUEST OF THE CORPO- RATION, TO TELL THEM THEY WERE UNABLE COLLECT THE TOLLS TO THE FULL EXTENT; THAT, IF THE PAVING COMMISSIONERS WOULD ACCEPT FROM THEM AS MUCH AS THEY COULD COLLECT TO THE EXTENT OF 2,200 /. OR SHORT OF IT, IF THEY WERE NOT ABLE COLLECT SO MUCH, THAT THEY WOULD ENDEAVOUR TO COLLECT IT FOR THEIR USE, AND HAND TO THEM ALL THEY RECEIVED, TILL IT AMOUNTED TO 2,2001.; BUT THEY DID NOT WISH TO RECEIVE IT, IF BY RECEIVING IT THEY SHOULD SUBJECT THEMSELVES TO THE WHOLE DEBT. WHAT ANSWER DID THEY GIVE TO THAT COMMUNICATION ?— THEY TOLD ME, THEY WOULD HOLD NO COMMUNICATION WITH ME ON THE SUBJECT. WAS THERE ONLY ONE APPLICATION MADE, OR WERE THERE ANY FURTHER APPLICATIONS MADE ?— THEY MADE APPLICATIONS TO GOVERNMENT ON THE SUBJECT. DO YOU REMEMBER WHAT REPLY GOVERNMENT MADE ?— THE SECRETARY FOR IRELAND TOLD US, THAT IF WE WOULD BRING THE CAUSE TO ISSUE, SO AS TO ESTABLISH OUR TITLE, THEY WOULD AID US IN THE COLLECTION OF IT; IN CONSEQUENCE OF THAT WE MADE SEVERAL SEIZURES OF CORN, TO SEE IF BY DISTRESS WE COULD FORCE A SUIT TO TRY THE RIGHT AND MAKE THE OTHER PARTY PLAINTIFFS IN THE CAUSE. WHERE DID YOU MAKE THE SEIZURES ?— AT THE DIFFERENT TOLL- GATES ; WE ALWAYS TOOK CARE TO CONFINE IT WITHIN THE CITY, SO AS NOT TO MAKE A SEIZURE IN THE COUNTY. WHAT WAS THE RESULT OF THOSE PROCEEDINGS ?— THE PARTIES FREQUENTING THE MARKET, WHEN WE ATTEMPTED TO MAKE THEM PLAINTIFFS, NEVER BROUGHT AN ACTION, BUT THEY CAME AND PAID THE TOLLS IN A FEW DAYS AFTERWARDS. FEELING OURSELVES UNABLE TO MAKE THE FARMERS FREQUENTING THE MARKETS PLAINTIFFS IN THE CAUSE, WE BROUGHT AN ACTION AGAINST SOME OF THEM FOR DEFRAUDING US OF THE TOLLS ; THEY SUFFERED JUDGMENT TO GO AGAINST THEM BY DEFAULT; THEY NEVER WOULD COME TO A TRIAL. YOU HAVE HAD JUDGMENT UPON THOSE ACTIONS BROUGHT BY YOU?— YES. WHAT WAS THE AMOUNT THAT THE CORPORATION RECEIVED FOR THE TOLLS IN ANY ONE YEAR BEFORE THESE DISPUTES AROSE ?— IN THE YEAR 1813, TO THE BEST OF MY RECOLLECTION, THEY RECEIVED 5,250/,; AND AFTERWARDS, WHEN THE PEACE CAME, THEY FELL, AND WERE SET FOR 4,100 /. WERE YOU THE TENANT AT 4,100 /. ?— I WAS THE TENANT AT 5,200/. WHO WERE THE FORMER TENANTS ?— FOR A GOOD MANY YEARS IT WAS HELD BY A MAN OF THE NAME OF CLARKE, A FOUNDER, IN SMITHFIELD OR KING- STREET. 549. 3 H What J. c. Beresford, Esq. ( 28 May.) I lyl I Hi M r 1