V 76 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE MJ. Patrick Flood, registered had a qualification ?- I am not saying that they had not; I was " — requested to go upon their lands, but I would not do it. 8 May 1838. 82.58. You do not say that they had not a qualification .— Indeed, I would not take upon me to say that. & 2 5Q You say that Liberals were rejected who had 20 acres, whilst Con- servatives were admitted who had but seven acres .-— From six to seven and ei°" ht 8260 Will you mention a few instances of Liberals who were rejected with 20 acres ?— A man of the name of Christopher Fitzsimons, near Granard, was rejected on 16 acres. 8261. What rent did he pay ?— Something like 38 s. an acre. 8262. What is the name of his farm ?— It is close to the town of Granard. 8263. Has it a name ?— I think it is Ballinacross. 8264. Who is his landlord?— Mr. Greville, an English gentleman. 8265. Were those Conservatives who were admitted upon eight acres subject to as high rent as 38 s. an acre ?— No, they did not pay so high a rent. 8266. Do not you think that the value of a man's interest in a concern is to be estimated as much by the rate of the rent, as by the quantity of land he holds ?— I do, certainly. 8267. Then, what do you mean by saying that the Conservatives were ad- mitted upon only seven acres, whilst Liberals were rejected who held 20, without taking the rent into account ?— I will give you the case of the two Vances : they were both Protestant tenants ; they were admitted on 15 acres, and a man of the name of Read, living close to them, was rejected upon 20 acres. 8268. What was the rent ?— About a guinea and a half an acre ; William and James Vance. 8269. Who was their landlord?— Mr. Greville also; the same estate. 8270. What was the name of the Liberal who was rejected ?— Read. 8271. He held 15 acres also ?— Yes, on the same farm, the same townland. 8272. At the same rent?— Yes. 8273. On the same quality of land?— Yes. 8274. Who rejected that Liberal ?— I think it was Mr. Fosberry; I will not take upon me positively to say which of the barristers rejected him. 827.5. When was he rejected?— In 1832. 8276. You cannot take upon yourself to say whether it was Mr. Fosberry or Mr. Dogherty ?— No. 8277. The Mr. Dogherty you speak of is the gentleman who goes the north- west circuit ?— Yes. 8278. Do you state to this Committee that the man Read was rejected for want of value ?— Yes, I do. 8279. No other objection whatever to his claim to register ?— Not that I am aware of. 8280. Will you undertake to say that there was no other objection?— To the best of my belief there was no other objection. 8281. Were not you present?— I staid in Mr. Fosberry's court; I never went into Mr. Dogherty's. 8282. Then how can you be under any difficulty to say whether it was Mr. Dogherty or Mr. Fosberry ?— Counsellor Colquhoun, who attended on the Liberal part, is dead, and his notes are lost. 8283. Do you mean to say that you are giving evidence here of matters not within your own knowledge ?— I served a notice for Read myself at the time. 8284. Have you been now giving to the Committee evidence of matters not within your own knowledge ?— No, but I mean as to what the barrister did; the other is within my own knowledge. 8285. Were you present when that man was rejected ?— I cannot say that I was. 8286. How do you know what passed, when you cannot tell whether you were by or not ?— Because I served notice for the man. 8287. If you cannot say whether you were present, HOW can you undertake to say that no objection was made upon any other ground than want of value? — I he man said that he had a better interest, and that his land was better than the two Vances, Avho were admitted, and he was rejected. 8288. Is