SELECT COMMITTEE ON FICTITIOUS VOTES, IRELAND. 201 „ 7 1 c? 11343. When he came up formerly to register, at the time to which Mr. Griffiths' Mr. E. Rooney. evidence applies, were you present P— I was not; I may have been present, but I took no note of it, and do not recollect anything of it. 25 May 1838. 11344. Do you think it is quite impossible that upon that occasion he might have stated the rent he really agreed to pay as his rent, and not the rent reserved in his lease, which was a mistaken rent ? — I do not think he could ; and besides, Mr. Griffith said he had but 15 acres, and the man has nearly 22 acres. He made a mistake both in the acreage and the rent. 11345- You say he made a mistake ?— He swore there were 15 acres at 15 I. a year : he had a lease ; I was upon the land, and I have a map of it here containing 21 acres, 2 roods, 35 perches. 11346. Now 1 ask you again, is it possible the man when he first came up to register, in stating what his rent was, might have stated what the rent he really agreed to pay was, and not the rent reserved in the lease, which is admitted to be a mistake?— It certainly is not impossible, but it is exceedingly improbable. 11347. Mr. French.'] Is it not very improbable that such a mistake should remain uncorrected by the registering barrister, when he must have looked over the lease to see what the rent reserved was?— I think it is impossible such a case could have occurred. 11348. Mr. Lefroy.] Did the other valuators on the same side as you, give evidence before the Committee of his rent, and the quantity of his land ?— They did. 11349. And according to their statement, what was the rent and the quantity of the land ?— According to Mr. Bracken's evidence before the Committee, he stated that he held 21 acres, 2 roods, 35 perches, at 12/. 85. ~ d., and he was asked whether English or Irish acres, and he said Irish. 11350. In what part of the county of Longford is this land?- - In the barony of Rathcline. 11351. That is not land of the quality we have heard from some other witnesses, that can be tilled for nine or ten years without manure?— It is not; there is such land in the county, I understand, but that is not, I am sure. 11352. Mr. French.] But it is good land ?— It is ; that particular farm is good. 11353. Chairman.] He was rejected by Mr. Dogherty, was not he ?— No, he was rejected here by The House of Commons. 11354- Was he never rejected before?— No. 11355. Are you quite sure of that?— I do not think he was ; I am not aware of it. 11356. Mr. French.] He was registered by two barristers?— He was registered in the October sessions, and he appeared to have been registered before ; I am not aware of any time that he was registered, except the last time. 11357. Was he not registered after he was struck off by the Committee?— He was. 11358. Chairman.] What I want to know is, whether it did not appear before the Committee of 1832 that his claim was rejected by Mr. Dogherty?— I am not aware that it did. 11359. And that he was admitted upon the registry upon the ground of his old certificate?— I am not aware of that; it might be so. 11360. You have looked to the evidence taken before the Committee of 1837? — Yes, some of it. 11361. You have looked at those points upon which you thought you could give satisfactory evidence before the Committee, but not at all of it?— Yes. 11362. Mr. French.] If he was rejected by Mr. Dogherty for want of value, he might have appealed on that ground ?— Indeed he might, if it was for want of value. 11363. How could Mr. Dogherty reject him for want of value, when he was registered before the passing of the Reform Bill ?— That is what astonishes me, to hear that he could, as he was registered previous to the Reform Bill. I do not know why he was rejected. 11364. Mr. Lefroy.'] Supposing he came up, not upon his former certificate, but his value, might not he have been rejected ?— He might. 11365. Mr. French.] It was not necessary for him to appear at all before Mr. Dogherty ; the fact of his being upon the books would have been sufficient?— Certainly. 11366. Then how do you consider that Mr. Dogherty could have rejected him upon the value ?— I think he would have been very badly advised to have gone upon the value at all, when he had his certificate to go upon. 643. D D 11367- Even