188 Ml N X J T E S O F E V I D E N C E T A K E N B E F O R E T HE Mr 22 May 1838. James Ternan. 10842. What was the ejectment for upon which the habere was grounded? — I think it was for non- payment of rent. 10843. Was M'Laughlin the immediate tenant of Lord Lorton ?— No, he was not; a person of the name of Greer or Hamilton was. Hamilton, I think, was the immediate tenant, and M'Laughlin was tenant to him. 10844. Then it was for non- payment of rent by Hamilton that the ejectment was brought ?— It was. 10845. And after that you took possession under that habere, you gave it up to Mr. Kenney, Lord Lorton's under- agent ?— The person doing business for his agent. 10846. On behalf of the upper- agent?— Yes. 10847. You are quite sure that that Peter M'Laughlin afterwards voted out of his land at the election of 1837 ?— Quite sure; I saw him brought up by Mr. Kenney, and I think Mr. Courtenay, and vote. That was a month or two after he was evicted. 10848. Mr. O'Connell.] Do you know whether he was required to take the qualification oath ?— I am sure he was. 10849. And he took it ?— Yes. 10850. Mr. Curry.] Do you know a person of the name of William Ste- phenson, of Clouterfer ?— I do. 10851. Did he vote at the election in August 1837 ?— He did. 10852. By virtue of what qualification did he vote?— As a 50 I. freeholder. 10853. vou know whether or not he had been evicted from the lands of Clouterfer before the election of 1837?— Yes; in the month previous I took possession of the lands. 10854. Was it in your capacity of under- sheriff that you took possession of them ?— Yes. 10855. At whose suit had the ejectment been brought?— At the suit of Mr. Featherstone. 10856. Do you recollect whether that was an ejectment for non- payment of rent, or was it upon the title ?— It was upon the title ; the life had dropped. 10857. Did Clouterfer form part of the lands out of which William Ste- phenson had registered ?— They formed the greater part of the lands. 10858. Mr. O'Connell.] Can you say whether he had a 50/. freehold in the other parts ?— I cannot take upon me to say exactly; I think he had not, so far as I know. 10859. he had, there would have been no reason for joining Clouterfer ?— No, there would have been no reason for joining the three; that is one reason why I know he had not a qualification. I know that the others were a much less quantity of land that he registered out of. 10860. Mr. Curry.] Do you know Mr. S. Robinson?— I did know a young gentleman of that name; he is dead. 10861. Chairman.'] With regard to the individuals you have stated to have voted in this manner, how long have they been upon the register ?— I think they have been since 1832, two of them; M'Laughlin has been only since 1836; I believe he registered at the June sessions of 1836. 10862. He voted in 1837 ?— Yes. 10863. Were any of the others upon the register previously?— I think the others were on since 1832. 10864. Conboy and Stephenson voted in 1832?— Yes. 10865. When did they lose their qualification, according to your idea?— Conboy lost his between 1832 and 1834. 10866. Then Conboy, having been put upon the register in 1832, having lost his qualification, as you say, between 1832 and 1834, voted in 1835, 1836, and 1837 •— I am not sure as to 1836, but I was present when he voted in 1835 and 1837. 10867. You say that Stephenson was put on in 1832; when did he lose his qualification?— In March 1837. 10868. And he voted in August 1837 ?— Yes. 10869. Mr- Lefroy.] You say that you attended the whole of Mr. Dogherty's registry except a day or two ?— I attended the whole of Mr. Dogherty's, and the whole of Mr. Fosberry's, except about eight'or ten days. 10870. Then you had an opportunity of judging Mr. Fosberry's conduct upon the registry ."— Yes, I had. : v 10871. Did