S E L E C T C O M M I T T E E O N F I C T I T I O U S V O T E S , I R E L A N D . 295 L ? / 13183. Did you see that ?- No ; he told me he had his warrant; he told me so John F. Fosbury, very lately. I conceive it was for the purpose of assisting, for I had written the Esq. day before he came down, stating that I could not conclude. I wrote no other letter except the day before his arrival, stating I could not conclude by the period 8 June l838' I had mentioned. 13184. Could that letter have had the effect of causing him to come down — No, for they must have received the letter the very day he arrived. 13185. Could your first letter have been so shaped as to cause the Government to conclude you wanted an assistant?— No. 13186. Then you can give the Committee no information as to the cause of his appointment?— No, I cannot. 13187. Had you ever any discussion amounting to a difference of opinion with Mr. Doherty on the point of beneficial interest?— Not the slightest; we never spoke about it. I told him what my view of the beneficial interest was,' but I did not ask him what his view of it was. I had been attacked upon that ground. 13188. Did he assent to or dissent from it?— I do not think he made any remark one way or other. 13189. You never had any discussion with him on that point, by which you can tell the Committee what his opinions were ?— Certainly not. 13190. Were cases ever sent from his court to yours?— Not that I am aware of. I before stated, in order to prevent any appearance of favouritism on one side or the other, I had so many names called in my court, and divided those, and sent so many into his court, and retained so many in mine. 13191. But you do not remember a case in which you registered persons he had declined to register ?— No; some persons came forward on certificates; some certificates were produced, but whether they were before him or not I cannot say. 13192. It might happen that persons who attempted to register before you went before Mr. Doherty and might succeed better, and it might happen that persons who had attempted to register before him and been refused might succeed before you?— I cannot conceive that that could happen, for the clerk of the peace would make an entry of the names and numbers. Perhaps a person might register vivd voce. 13193. Do you recollect at all the circumstance of Mr. Greville's tenants being brought up to register?— Yes, I remember Mr. Greville's tenants very well indeed. 13194. What was your impression about them ?— My impression was, that there was more perjury going 011 respecting his tenants than any others; they were the very worst description of persons who appeared in Longford, in point of demeanour and everything else. There were some persons produced at Longford who came for- ward and swore in the most extraordinary way ; in such a way that I certainly was obliged to discredit a great number of them. 13195. Did it appear to you, generally speaking, that Mr. Greville very much underlet his farms ?— No, his farms appeared to be let very high, to my mind. They complained of the high rents; in some places adjoining the town of Granard the land was very good; they paid 2/. 155. or 2 I. 17 an acre, or something of that kind. 13196. Then you did not look upon Mr. Greville's tenants in the same favourable view you did Colonel White's ?— No, certainly not. 13197. Mr. Lefroy.] And you considered a good deal of perjury was committed on the attempt to register those tenants?—! think there was; perhaps some of the hardest swearing that occurred during the registry was on the part of Mr. Gre- ville's tenants. 13198. Chairman.] Can you state whether there were many fresh leases given by Mr. Greville at the time of your registry ?— I do not think there were, as well as I can remember. 13199. Mr. Curry.] You said you thought an annual revision of the list would be a desirable thing to establish ?— Yes. 13200. Would not that lead to one of the mischiefs you have mentioned; viz. as producing a degree of excitement in the whole of the country at least once a year ?— It. would lead to the assembling of a great number of persons. 13201. Once a year?— Yes; but if that annual registry were confined to the investigation of those cases where persons had lost the qualification 13202. Is that what you now call a revision of the register?— 1 es. 13203. Then the only thing you would have brought forward at the annual re- gistry would be the list of persons who had died or lost their qualification ?— Yes, upon proper notice. ^ 43. PP4 iVA1-