S E L E C T C O M M I T T E E ON F I C T I T I O U S V O T E S , IRELAND. ; 5 3 7 C at this sessions, and then he thought and said that the franchise ought to he r u^ , r very much extended, and that such was the intention of the Legislature in h ^ passing the Reform Bill. & " 1 T\ T rsn m v , 26 June 1838. 14001. Mr. 0 Cornell] You are aware there is a recital to that effect in the Reform Bill ? I am aware that there is a recital that it was to be extended but not so much or to the extent that Mr. Gibson extended it to, in my opinion. ' y 14002. Mr. Serjeant Jackson.] Do you consider the meaning of that recital which has been referred to, to have had regard to conferring the franchise upon a new class of persons, or to giving a construction to the qualification created by the Act, which let 111 persons who did not strictly possess the qualification - — My opinion is, that that recital applies only to the new description of voters who were introduced by that Act. 14003. That Act did introduce new classes of voters r— Yes. 14004. And therefore it was one of the objects and purposes of that Act to extend the elective franchise to a new class of persons ?— Certainly. 14005. But you do not consider that recital or preamble as at all altering or straining the law, to let in persons to register who do not possess both of the qualifications specified ?— No ; I think that recital of the intention of the Legis- lature in that Act, was to extend the franchise to certain classes of individuals who are in that Act specified, and not to any others. 14006. Now, you said in answer to a former question put by the honourable and learned member for Dublin, that Mr. Gibson extended the same rule to all. and then were proceeding to make an addition to that and you checked yourself, not desiring to volunteer any answer ; it is, however, quite necessary that we should have the qualification, and I now distinctly ask you what it was that was passing in your mind at the time you said that Mr. Gibson extended the same rule to all ?— I was going to add that the rule, although administered impartially, was a rule which had the effect of giving a great preponderance to the Liberal interest. 14007. When you speak of the Liberal interest, what is it you mean; you spoke of the predominance of numbers upon the Liberal interest, do you mean to say it let in Roman- catholics ; is that what you mean ?— I do not confine it to Roman- catholics, I mean persons in the interest of the Liberal party. 14008. When you spoke of the three provinces and the midland counties, what class of persons was it you referred to ?— Small holders of land. 1400Q. I collect the question to have been put to you, with a view to ascer- tain the relative proportions of the different persuasions in those counties; in those provinces which have been referred to by the honourable and learned Member for Dublin the predominant population is Roman- catholics ?— Cer- tainly. 14010. In those provinces the Protestant population is comparatively thin ? — The landed proprietors are generally Protestants; the small landholders are almost universally Catholics. 14011. And the effect of opening the doors so very wide is to let in a pre- ponderance of Roman- catholics ?— Certainly, in those counties. 14012. You stated, upon a former day, you attended the registry in another county ; in Wicklow, for example ?— I did. 14013. Were you permitted to inspect the instrument upon which the parties claimed in that county ?— Yes, invariably; and rejected a great many claims upon objections appearing upon the face of those instruments. 14014. Does it not often happen that a number of available objections arise from the opportunity of inspecting the instrument r— A very great number. 14015. Are not a number of fictitious votes introduced successfully by the practice of withholding the inspection of the instrument from the counsel who is employed to examine and check and investigate them ?— It necessarily must, because the assistant barrister, sitting as a judge, cannot apply his mind with the same degree of care to detect frauds as a counsel, whose business it is to detect them, would apply his mind to it. The judge is indifferent upon the sub- ject, and he does not exercise that degree of care and caution which a counsel does, whose duty it is. 14016. It would be the duty of a counsel to exercise as mucn astuteness as he could, so as to discover objections in the instrument, to prevent the party getting upon the registry ?— It is his duty, but according to my understanding, 643. " xx nothing