14 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Colonel 56.
Have you always considered it as improper, and even as illegal, for the police Sir JoAn Hffra#-to assist in serving processes or in distraining?—Certainly;
they are prohibited by
the regulations, 19 January 1832.
^ In what service were the police employed upon that occasion at Knock-topher ?—In
protecting a process-server of Dr.
Hamilton's for an arrear of tithes.
58.
Was their assistance always limited to cases in which affidavits had been made that the process-server's life was in danger?—
It was limited to such cases; a previous affidavit was required in all cases to .warrant
the interference of the police.
59.
Are the Committee to understand that if a process-server makes an affidavit of the danger to which he is exposed in serving the process, the police constable is bound to give him any force that he would consider necessary to protect his person ?
—No; the magistrate would issue a warrant upon that affidavit.
It is at the dis-cretion of the magistrate; and in this case it was distinctly ordered by the resident magistrate of the county.
60.
Do you know of any cases in which the process-server has not attempted to serve process, but, only because he was afraid, has declared that he could not do it without the assistance of the police ?—I
think I do.
61.
Y'ou say that these disturbances began in the parish of Graigue, and that in that parish the composition is established ; is there any difference between the mode of levying composition rent and the mode of levying other rent ?—Under
the compo-sition, I have always understood that if there is any arrear of tithe rent, it is in the power of the clergyman to obtain a process, upon which his dliver distrains at once upon the land which owes the tithe.
62.
Upon any arrear of rent, is not the landlord equally enabled to distrain ?—
I should imagine so.
63.
Are you not aware that the people of the country distinguish between land-lord's rent and composition rent ?—I
have stated that their impression is, that they receive value for the one and not for the other.
64.
Might not the mode of resistance which has been here applied to resist the payment of composition rent be equally applied to resist the payment of rent due to the landlord?—There
is not a doubt of it, if the combination was directed to that object.
65.
And there is no greater hardship in the levy of the composition rent than in the levy of the landlord's rent ?—Not
the least, that I am aware of.
66.
Excepting that the tenant conceives that he receives value in one case and no value in the other ?—Certainly.
67.
You are aware that in all leases granted since the Composition Act was passed the landlord is bound to let the land tithe free, and to take the clergyman's receipt for a portion of the rent ?—So
I conceive.
68.
Then, in fact, do you conceive that it is the occupying tenant or the landlord that pays the tithe rent ?—The
landlord.
69.
You were understood to state that the dissatisfaction arose, in a great degree, from attempting to levy the tithe from the Catholic priest in the parish ?—That
was one of the causes to which we imputed it.
70.
You have stated that it is the general, if not the universal, practice of the Protestant clergy in Ireland not to take any tithe from the priest for the land which, as priest, he holds in the parish, and that that practice was departed from in this instance ?—So
I understand.
71.
Do you happen to know whether the distraint upon the priest was not for another farm, which he had taken in the parish subsequently to the establishment of the tithe composition ?—I
have heard that that was the case.
72.
And that the levy upon him was not, therefore, in contravention of the estab-lished courtesy between the clergy of the Established Church and the Catholic priest-hood ?—That
was the statement of Mr.
M'Donald, the resident clergyman in the parish; but that did not appear to us to change materially the view that we took of the subject.
73.
Does not that make a decided distinction; that if the priest becomes a large farmer in the parish, and takes a considerable quantity of land, it never could be the intention that he should, in that case, be exempted from the payment of the tithe ?—I
quite believe that.
But perhaps I may be allowed to mention that a _
very short time previous to these occurrences at Graigue, the Roman-catholic Bishop of Kilkenny had been called upon for the payment of parish cess -he
