kio' ON THE LOCAL TAXATION OF THE CITY OF DUELIN. 73 represented that in Easter term 1817, the insolvencies amounted to the sum of Mr. 536I. 19 s. 2 d. whereas the true amount returned by the collector, was only John McMullen. 282/. ys. making a credit fairly due to the parish, of 2521. 10s. 2d. In tbeV ~ ' applotment for Michaelmas 1818, there is an error of a similar kind to the pre- ^ judice of the parish of 99/. 19s. 10d. In the applotment for Easter 1820, and in the subsequent terms, similar errors and differences appear to exist, which cannot now be ascertained, as the parish have not been furnished with the proper returns, but from all which it is fairly to be presumed, that the balance claimed by the treasurer of the grand jury, would be still further greatly reduced, if the account were fully and fairly stated and settled. The affidavit in which this is detailed, proceeds to state, that at a full vestry the churchwardens were instructed to traverse this presentment for the arrears of 1,2511. 5s. and that this would have been done within the period limited by law, had the parishioners been aware of the amount of the presentment; the warrant, however, was not delivered till the time for traversing had expired, and the court, though unwillingly, was obliged, as I have already stated, to refuse the application and to confirm the presentment. The overcharge, as far as I can learn, is in this case not less than from 500/. to 600/. Then in point of fact, the court determined that the law was against you ?— Yes. Then the fault is in the law, and not in the grand jury?— Certainly, there is a fault in the law, but I blame the officer of the grand jury for not having served the warrant in time, this was owing to the neglect either of the grand jury, or their officer. Were not the sums contained in those arrears fiated six months before, by the court?— I am not aware of the fact, and as far as I am informed, it is not possible that it could be the case. The arrears must have been fiated by the preceding judge, at the instance of the grand jury?— It is not to be considered merely in the light of a presentment, but in the light of a disputed account. Was that a disputed account as between the treasurer and the parish?— Yes. The grand jury had nothing to say to that account?— The individual members of the grand jury had, perhaps, nothing to say to it, but I think the detail of the circumstances must clearly show that the accounts of the grand jury, and of the treasurer, are kept in a manner that is highly objectionable, and that very great difficulty exists in obtaining redress. Are you aware of any transaction that took place between Alderman Nugent and a Mr. Dalton, who w'as in his employ, and who was a contractor ?— Mr. Dalton has been frequently the contractor for the clothing and bedding furnished to the gaol of Newgate; during the time that he undertook those contracts, he was, as I am informed, the clerk or shopman of Alderman Nugent. Did you not say, that the grand juries of Dublin have not much of the confidence of the parishes or of the city ?— That is my opinion. Is that opinion founded on thinking that they misuse their powers of present- ment ?— It is. You said that among other misuses of that power, the salaries of officers and the payment of expenses of prisons was one abuse and complaint?— Yes. Is that opinion founded upon any examination of the expense of the prisons in the city of London ?— It is partly so founded ; at the same time I do not think that the prisons of the city of London ought to be made a standard by which the expen- diture of the prisons of Dublin should be measured, inasmuch as the funds which are applied in support of the prisons of London, are, in point of fact, almost private property; the prisons of the city of London are supported at the expense of the corporation, and not by any tax or assessment levied upon the householders. In the instance of surgeon to the city of London, what is the expense of the sur- geon, including medicine ?— The whole medical expense of the gaol of Newgate, in London, is only 500 I. a year. Does that include all medicine and medical expense, and does it include all expense of nursing, & c. & c.; is it for all matters connected with medicinal pur- poses?— So I am informed. Are you informed of the number contained in each of those gaols ?— The number at present contained in Newgate, in London, is about 310. What may be the comparative expense of the prisons in Dublin, as compared 549- " N with