SELECT COMMITTEE ON FICTITIOUS VOTES, IRELAND. sJ7' 24T Mr. O. 6019. Was he sworn ?— He wa « person intimated to the Ws name' and - mediately some — to me court that he ought to be objected to upon that ground .022 As not a competent witness ?- As not a competent witness, by reason of his being paid for his services. y 1CtUUI1 6023 Was the objection taken to the competency of Captain Allen argued? — No; the barristers instantly stated that they would not receive the evidence of a person paid for that purpose ; instantly, without any argument. We certainly remonstrated m some measure against it, but it was useless; it did not last. a moment scarcely; it being the first day of the sessions, there was even a hoot. 6024. Mr. Lefroy.] The three barristers were sitting together at that time > — They were. 6025. And they agreed not to receive the evidence of this witness because he was paid Because he was paid for the purpose of examining into the registry, as to the qualification of the voters, with a view to the registry. 6026. Chairman.] Do you mean to say that all the three barristers concurred in that decision ?— Yes. 6027. In open court?— In open court. 6028. Did they lay down that no witness should be received unless he could state that he was not paid for his attendance ?—' That was the rule fixed upon the production of that witness. 6029. Was that rule adhered to throughout the whole of the investigation?— Certainly ; and the evidence of those persons to whom we paid so much money for that purpose became quite useless, except so far as information given to the agents in the examination we pursued respecting each person's vote. 603 o. They applied this equally to both political parties ?— I believe there was no person paid on the other side; they appeared to me to be all partisans and volunteers there. 6031. Mr. Serjeant Jackson.] Are the Committee to understand that the effect of this rule laid down by the registering barristers, was to exclude you in effect from the benefit of the evidence of any of those 12 gentlemen?— The Committee are to understand that. 6032. Then you lost the benefit entirely of the investigation you had made ? — Completely ; and we could only take up the evidence of such persons as we could casually meet with in the different courts, as might be present when the persons offered to register. 6033. You had not any other persons employed during the 10 days but those who were appointed to go round through the districts ?— No. 6034. Therefore, when those 12 gentlemen were virtually excluded by the united judgment of the three registering barristers, you were without any pre- paration for the purpose of resisting the registration of fictitious voters?— Completely. 6035. You were all at sea, and you had to trust merely to the casual evidence of some party that might happen to know something about the man ?— Exactly so ; in some cases they allowed a postponement, to give time to investigate when there was an assertion upon one side that it was not value, and an assertion on the other side that it was value; time was allowed, in a few cases, to investigate whether it was so or not. 6036 Then it must have happened that in many cases you were totally pre- cluded from making any resistance at all to the registration r- In a great in the great bulk of the cases ?- In the great bulk of those that might have been questioned; but there were a great many that we admitted without any question, when we knew them to have value. , , . 6038. Your object was not to make captious objections, 01 to cau e e a but only to see that they were bona fide persons put upon the register, who were really entitled to the franchise That was our object 5_ N 6039 And when you knew them to be such, there was no objection . - None 0.46. N N