,6 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE Richard Daly, Y. sq. 17 July 1838. rent; worth 10?. a year over the rent. Cross- examined: Pays the landlord the rent; 11A. 3R. 35 P." He was rejected, the lease not being executed within six months prior to the day of holding the court of registration. 15148. What was the other case ?—' The case of Thomas Bryan. 1 5149. Was it at the same sessions ?— Yes ; 25th October 1836 : " Thomas Bryan, Lemonaghan," ( that was the place of his residence,) " holds 12 acres; some pasture, some tillage; its worth 10?. a year over and above rent and taxes. Cross- examined : Lease made this month. Court: ' Why was it dated in March last ?' Brother made it to him, and can't tell when it was filled. Rejected, not being sufficient time in possession." 15150. It did not appear that man was six months in possession at all ?— It did not appear that man was six months in possession ; it did appear the lease was made the month of registration. 15151. That was a clear case for rejection ?— Yes. 15152. Now, when the claimant preferred his title under a will, did Mr. Gib- son require in every case evidence of that will ?— Mr. Gibson required the pro- duction of the will; and if the will was in existence, and the claimant stated that it was lodged in the Ecclesiastical Court, he always required an attested copy of the will to be taken out of that court. 15153. An attested and compared copy?— Yes, an attested and compared copy of the will to be taken out of that court. Indeed, at one time, he was about laying down ( I do not say he did lay down the principle) that the original will should be produced. I reasoned with him upon the hardship of taking an officer of the court down with the original will in his hands, as in the case of an ejectment the heavy expense it would be to a 10 1. claimant, and he then abandoned that notion. 15154. You are apprised that, in practice, in Ireland, the officers of the Ecclesiastical Court will not give the original will to any agent or attorney upon security, but one of the officers of that court comes down with the will when- ever it is to be produced ?— Precisely; that is the practice, as far as I under- stand, in . Ireland. To be sure, proof may be dispensed with by consent, by furnishing the consent of the opposite party. 15155. I am speaking of a case where the will becomes necessary to be pro- duced ; so that it could not cost less than from 20 to 30 guineas to produce the original will in the King's County ?— At least. 15156. He then allowed that to be supplied by an attested copy of the will? — Yes. 15157. He did not require the will to be exemplified, and the stamp duty paid for an exemplification, I suppose ?— No- 15158. How many modes of ascertaining the value did Mr. Gibson resort to r — One mode was that admitted by Mr. Cosgreave, the balance of profit, with all the deductions which I have already mentioned. 15159. Did that include labour ?— It included labour. 15160. Did it include labour in the cases in which the man himself worked upon the farm ?— With regard to that he was always asked how many he had in the family; some would state they had seven 01* eight, and a further question was put: What might be the value of the support of that family? That undoubtedly he made use of as an ingredient in the calculation. 15161. His paying for their labour ?— Yes, he used it as a test; not as an inflexible standard, but merely as an ingredient in the calculation. 15162. As supporting so many individuals?— Yes, as supporting so many individuals ; he then took into account the general profits of the farm, the marketable value of it, and he then deducted" from the gross amount all inci- dental expenses, and if there were no witnesses examined to impugn the testimony of the claimant, he felt himself coerced by his evidence, and regis- tered him. 15163. But whenever the opposing party thought fit to produce witnesses, he listened to those witnesses ?— In all cases, particularly where their testimony was of that accurate and definite nature which led him to suppose they had a clear knowledge of the farm of the claimant; for, as far as I recollect, there were some gentlemen produced who could not at all define the mears and bounds of the farm they were valuing. 15164. Did he require the claimant in every case to satisfy him in detail that he had a profit of 10 I. clear over the charges and expenses?— I will say this: he