ON DUNGARVAN, YOUGHALL AND MALLOW BOROUGHS.
U 94.
I am asking you as to the boundaries ?—I
think the old would be better jfoA« £//«» CroJter, than the new, if there was a choice between the old and the proposed.
Esq.
95.
Do we understand you that you would prefer the old limits of the; *~~ ~
borough, if by adhering to these old limits you were to lose your vote for the y>'e 1832.
county, rather'than to propose limits, if by the proposed limits you were to have reserved to you both your right of voting for the county and for the borough ?
—By the proposed limits I shall be excluded from the borough, except for life.
96.
Your property would be taken out of the limits, but your right would be preserved as long as you possessed the property, that is, for your life; or would you prefer retaining for your life a double vote, and taking the boundaries pro-posed by the Reform Bill, or adhering to the present limits of the manor of Mallow, and at once losing the vote you now possess for the county ?—I
think if I was to lose either, I should rather lose the vote for the county.
97-You are aware that the constituency in the towns consist of 10 /.
house-holders possessed of a house and land, being together of the value of 10/.,
with-out reference to the period for which they may be possessed of them; what would be the effect upon the constituency of the manor of Mallow if you were to leave the whole extent of the manor and adopt that constituency ?—I
think the effect would be the subdivision of almost all the property about, to make free-holders or holders of property of 10/.,
and in the end it would be very injurious.
98.
If there were to be a constituency of the town, would you not think it-desirable to draw the limit of the future borough as closely as possible round the space which is occupied by houses?—I
think that is a thing that can never occur in the distance that I proposed of about an Irish mile ; for that part is chiefly composed of gentlemen's domains, that cannot and will not, I am sure, be subdivided for that purpose; I think it would not have that effect by giving it one Irish mile.
99-But with that constituency you would not recommend the adhering to the whole extent of the present boundaries of the borough of Mallow?—No,
I would not, though my family would have the very first interest in the manor, by subdividing the property, ultimately.
100.
What objection do you take to the line which is proposed, in point of principle, to the line which is proposed by the Boundary Bill?—I
think it excludes a number of those who have n vnto in tbp tnwn of Mallow, and for two reasons : first, that they are the most respectable persons that live outside this boundary, and I think would counteract low 10 /.
householders in Ballida-heen, which is now to be included in the new boundary ; secondly, it would make the constituency more respectable and more independent.
101.
From what you know of the description of persons who would be within *
the boundaries as proposed in the Bill, what description of people do you think they would be?—I
think that there are many of those 10/.
householders that may be corrupt, so that no man would be very comfortable who was to be re-turned by them.
102.
Within the proposed boundary, is there anything excluded which can' fairly be considered as part of the town or suburbs ?—As
to the suburbs, I con-ceive Captain Davis's, and he is excluded, and there are two or three houses adjoining Captain Davis's : Mr.
Purcell's is one.
103.
Are Mr.
Purcell's and Captain Davis's country houses and freehold property ?—They
are freehold property, I believe, and they are certainly in the country, but adjoining the town.
104.
What is the space between Captain Davis's and the nearest house in the first street of the town ?—I
should think Captain Davis's is not above a quarter of a mile English, and perhaps not quite so much.
105.
From your knowledge of the town of Mallow are you able to state what would be the probable constituency of the proposed limit?—I
do not think there would be of 10 /.
houses in the town of Mallow, certainly not over 200.
106.
What number of 10/.
houses do you think the whole manor would give, exclusive of the 200 of the town ?—I
do not think the whole manor would give of 10/.
houses over 50 in addition.
I cannot speak accurately.
107.
In estimating this number of 10/.
householders in the manor, do you include the persons who might under the Bill have a vote as householders, with the addition of any lands and outhouses ?—If
each person who had a house and land equal to 10/.
iu it had a vote, I think they would be over the present number of freeholders in-the manor.
680,-108.
