I SELECT COMMITTEE ON FICTITIOUS VOTES, IRELAND. 171 / P / 10633. That is to say, they had him brought into court before he ought to have been let in ?— Yes, when the list had been called over once; he came from Dublin, and wanted to return; and as a matter of courtesy to him, he being a respectable gentleman, he was taken out of his turn. 10634. Being in court, he was allowed to register out of his turn ?— Yes. 10635. And was that the case you had in your mind, when you gave your evidence upon the direct examination, that gentlemen who had the ear of the court got in persons on one side, and excluded them on the other ?— No, it was not that; but I could not particularise the persons. 10636. Will you give me any case where gentlemen who had the ear of the court exercised that advantage by getting in persons favourable to their side, and excluding others ?— It was generally the case, that they had those persons who were likely to be called, comfortably seated on that side of the court; and according as they were called they got them up without trouble or delay. 10637. I want to know how it was they interfered with the barrister and achieved the object of getting their own people in and keeping the other people out? — It was not the barrister only, but the policemen; the other side had every facility to get their people up. 10638. Then when you used the expression, the " ear of the court," you meant not only the ear of the judge, but the ear of the police ?— Yes. 10639. You meant both ?— Yes. 10640. Now I want you to give me some instances bearing upon the judge, where the persons who had the ear of the court induced him to let some persons in and to keep others out; can you mention an instance?— I mentioned that case of Mr. Jessop. 10641. You told me that was not a case of that description; that he was in court, and was allowed to register?— He was come into the court, and they made an application to register him out of his turn ; and the list was travelled out of to accommodate him ; whereas the thing would not have been done for the other side. 10642. I want to know an instance in which those gentlemen who had the ear of the court and had the power of getting their own friends in and keeping the others out, did so ?— They had a facility of getting their friends in, when the same accommodation was not given on the other side. 10643. Can you give me an instance where those persons who had the ear of the court availed themselves of it, to get their own friends in, and to keep the others out?— I merely stated the thing generally; I cannot mention instances. 10644. Then you cannot state a single instance?— No, not an individual instance. 10645. Did you see the thing done?— I did, repeatedly. 10646. You repeatedly saw gentlemen interfere with the judge, to get their own friends into court, and to keep the others out ?— No. 10647. That is what I am asking ?— No; but I say they had a facility in getting their friends in, and the other side had not the same facility. 10648. I want you to give me one single matter of fact, upon which you found your statement, that certain persons, who had the ear of the court, interfered to get their own friends in, and to keep the others out?— I cannot state any particu- lar one, except Mr. Jessop. 10649. And vvas Jessop's case a case of that kind?— I considered it was. 10650. Did you not tell me just now that Mr. Jessop was in court?— He had come into court, and when he came into court, the list was travelled out of to register him. 10651. Was there any interference made with the judge to get him into court ? — That was not necessary. 10652. But that could not have been an instance to warrant your statement, that persons who had the ear of the court did influence the judge to let their friends into court, and to keep the others out?— I said they had a facility in getting their friends accommodation, which the others had not. 10653. That was what you meant by having " the ear of the court"?— When I alluded to the court, I meant the whole machinery generally. 10654. F> id You not tell me just now you included the judge as part of the machinery?— So I did. 643. z 2 10655. Mr. S Nieholls. 18 May 1838. ' hen