thout end could be
cited to show the necessity of this. I would, of course, exclude all
sects, though no Protestant preacher ever takes part directly or
indirectly in any of our political meetings. When a man has to make
oath as to the validity of his claim to the suffrage he will often
look at the priest who sits watching him. He gets a nod, and he goes
on with his swearing. The perjury of the Irish Revision Courts is
something fearful, and no one pays any attention to it. The Papists
swear just anything. They get absolved, but a Protestant has not this
great advantage and that holds him back. That is the Papist
explanation. In my presence the Home Rule inspector of this
district--we call the people who watch and work the registers the
inspectors--swore that James Kelly, of Cross Roads, Killygordon, was
the present tenant, the holder of the license, and the freeholder of a
public-house at the spot mentioned. Besides this he swore that the
name James Kelly was on the signboard. He therefore proposed to poll a
James Kelly. Now the person in question went to America in 1888, and
never returned. His name was not on the signboard, and the license was
for another person. The Judge declined to hear any further evidence
from Inspector Francis McLaughlin. That was the only penalty enforced.
Such things happen every day in Irish Revision Courts.

"A man named James Burns put in a claim for a vote on behalf of land
held at Stroangebbah. He had none there. What he had was at
Aughkeely, and this was not sufficient to entitle him to vote. Yes,
his name should be spelt Byrnes, but the Irish often prefer the
Protestant form of the name. Well, nobody believed that he was the
tenant of Stroangebbah; he was said to be a lodger only. The Judge
asked him for proof. He presented a paper purporting to be a receipt
for rent for Stroangebbah, but in reality the receipt was for the
ground at Aughkeely, which did not qualify. He curled up the paper so
as to show that his name was on it, and the Judge instantly passed his
claim, and placed him on the roll. A young fellow named Robert Ewing
at once exposed the trick, but the Judge declared that having placed
Burns on the roll, he must remain there until next revision. Judge
Keogh was his name. Yes, you would think an Irishman and a good
Catholic would have seen through such a trumpery trick.

"When an illiterate declares for whom he will vote, we sometimes have
from twenty to thirty outsiders in