Is there a disposition generally to attend to their religious duties?—I think there is a very strong disposition: there are exceptions to it, but generally speaking I think there is that disposition.

In their communication with each other, do they observe strictly the common and proper moral duties?-Their moral conduct in general is tolerably good.

Are they kind in their conduct towards each other?—They are generally.

Is there a readiness on their part to take advantage of the instruction that is afforded them at the schools?-A very great readiness; a great desire of receiving instruction in our schools. Is there a general disposition on the part of the people to come to confession ?-There is.

Does that disposition to come to confession vary according to the state of tranquillity, or of disturbance which prevails in the country? That has a very great influence upon that disposition.

Does the inclination to come to confession either increase or diminish when the country is in a state of disturbance? It diminishes considerably, manifestly.

Are the individuals who in those cases cease to come to confession, individuals who are connected or concerned in disturbances in the country?-Invariably I have found it so. You recollect the year 1820?—Yes.

The immediate neighbourhood in which you reside, and a great part of the arch-diocese of Tuam, was at that time considerably disturbed?—Yes.

Did you find that the indisposition you allude to existed extensively at that period?—At that period I recollect it in a particular manner; we could not persuade them generally to comply with their religious duties.

Can you state any particular instances with respect to any particular part of the country where that happened?-In a parish in the immediate vicinity of Tuam, and in all the parishes where the disturbances prevailed, I found an indisposition on the part of the people to attend their religious duties, and even their attendance at prayers on Sunday was by no means so regular as it was previously and subsequently thereto. Did you find generally, at that period, that the influence of the Catholic Clergy over their flocks was much impaired ?—I experienced myself that it was very much impaired, and that those, who on all former occasions paid very great attention to my advice, disregarded it upon that occasion.

Was their not in the demeanor of the people, and in their deportment towards the Catholic clergy, a great alteration at

that time from the habit of respect and deference which they nsually paid to their pastors?-Manifestly so. I had to go to several chapels on that occasion to address the people, and I have known instances where, after I had retired, some of those refractory persons assembled the people, and endeavoured to persuade them not to pay any attention to the advice I had given them, saying, what I had said was very good, but what relief did I give them that their distresses and their poverty were

not relieved.

Have any instances come within your knowledge of personal indignity or disrespect offered to members of the Catholic priesthood at that time, or of injuries to their property?—Not in my neighbourhood at that time.

Within your diocese were there not?-No personal insult.

Or injuries to property?-Not on that occasion. On former disturbances I have known injury to be done to the property of Roman Catholic clergymen; I have known their corn to be

set fire to.

Was that a very remote time?—I should think it was in the year 1807 or 1808.

You have stated that at that period the people complained of the price of land and the weight of taxes, did they not complain also of the exaction, as it was called, with respect to both religions which they complained of having to support?They complained of the priest, the parson, and the tithe procter.

When they complained of the priest, will you have the goodness to state what the particular circumstances of pressure upon the population were which they attributed to the priest? -They considered that oppressed as they were they could not afford to be giving the priest 2s. 6d. for baptisms, a guinea for a marriage, money for building a chapel, money for establishing a school; that, in short, the demands of the priest upon them were so many, that they could not answer them, and that it would be better not to attend to those things.

Part of the obligation which they imposed was not to make those payments to the priests?-It was; they bound them by an oath not to make those payments to the priests; in other instances, they bound them by an oath not to go to confession. Were the sums you have mentioned the fees at that time payable to the priests for the performance of those duties?— Yes.

Are the same sums still payable?—The same.

Have they been at that rate ever since you presided over the arch-diocese of Tuam ?—At that rate exactly; there has been no augmentation whatever.

Within your diocese is not the pressure of tithes payable to Protestant ministers particularly severe?-It is complained of generally.

Is it particularly severe as pressing upon the occupying tenant?It is particularly severe upon the occupying tenant. The tithe of potatoe is not payable in your arch-diocese ?— No, it is not.

Will you state what is the tithe, the payment of which presses particularly upon the tenant in the province of Connaught? Grain of every kind, flax, and I think wool, lambs,

&c.

Is he not much better off than the peasant in the province of Munster-Isuppose he is; but yet the tithe on corn they find very severe, particularly in a bad season; when the crop fails, they feel agreat hardship. I have heard them say in some instances that the tithe proctor's demand for tithe was to the full value of the crop.

The tithe of hay is not payable in the province of Connaught?—No, it is not; it has been demanded latterly by

some.

In the year 1820 very serious disturbances took place in the counties of Mayo and Galway?-In part of the counties of Mayo and Galway.

Does it come within your knowledge that the cause of those disturbances was attributable in any degree to the pressure of tithes?—They generally complained of tithes, taxes, grand jury cesses, vestry cesses, the payment of the Catholic clergy, the high price of land: all those things together.

Were their complaints louder against the pressure of tithes than against the pressure of any other charges?-No; they complained equally of high rents, grand jury cesses, and church

rates.

Those disturbances were the origin of what are usually called the White Boy disturbances? They were called Ribbonmen.

Then the efforts of those Ribbonmen were not directed specially against tithes ?-Not by any means; they were directed more against landlords.

You are aware that petitions were sent to Parliament complaining of the state of the law with regard to endowments of chapels and other charitable Catholic institutions, did you sign any of those petitions?—I do not at this moment recollect that I did.

Has not there been a decree of the court of Chancery that has contributed to settle the law recently?—I do not know that there has been a decree; there was some declaration made; I

have heard some person state that it did not amount to a decree.

In point of fact, have the Catholics such a confidence in the state of the law as to induce them to bequeath property for the purpose of endowing chapels or school-houses?-No, they havenot. When you stated just now the causes which led to the insurrection in 1820, amongst the complaints of the people which marked that insurrection, you stated the payment of dues to their own clergy, can you then have any doubt that the remission of those fees and the payment of dues of that nature, if provided for by any arrangement made by the State, would be extremely acceptable to the people themselves?—However much the people may have complained, I think they would prefer, notwithstanding, to support their own clergy, to seeing them paid by the State.

You mentioned to the Committee what the amount of the fees paid in your arch-diocese was, have you reason to believe that the amount of them is the same in other dioceses in Ireland, or is it greater or less-That is the general practice throughout the province of Connaught.

Is that practice regulated by agreement among your suffragans, or by any mandate or arrangement of yours?-By agreement amongst ourselves.

Are you aware whether the amount is the same in the province of Munster?-No; I believe there is some difference. Have you not heard that it is greater in the province of Munster-I believe it is greater; I am not acquainted with the province of Munster.

You mentioned to the Committee on the subject of early and improvident marriages, that in some instances the rite of marriage had been celebrated by a Protestant minister, in consequence of the disinclination of the Catholic clergyman to perform the ceremony?—Yes.

In such cases does the Protestant minister receive a fee for the performance of that duty from Catholics? They receive none from the poor I have heard.

Is the Catholic clergyman accustomed to marry the lowest order of the poor without demanding any fee?—Yes; often receiving no emolument whatsoever.

Besides the fee paid by the individuals who are united, is there not another source of benefit to the Catholic clergyman from contributions made at marriages?-Not in the province of Connaught at present.

Are they not accustomed to make collections ?-No, not at present, that I am aware of, in Connaught.

Has the disuse of that custom taken place since your presidency over that see, or has it never been the custom?-It has got into disuse within my time.

But it is still continued in other parts of Ireland?—I hear so. Have you not heard that it is a considerable source of the revenue of the Catholic clergyman in some parts of the south ?I understand it is.

Are there any other occasions on which collections or contributions are made by those who assist at ceremonies performed by the Catholic clergy?—None whatever; the only collections that we make are for the erection and repair of chapels and the establishment of schools.

Have you not at marriages what is called a cake?-No.

You stated that the only mode of enforcing the assessment that was levied for the repair of chapels was by threatening to. withhold the rites of the church, and that the rite which was threatened to be withheld was that of churching women; is that the only rite that is threatened to be withheld with a view of enforcing the payment of those assessments? That is the only rite they are allowed to withhold.

That of course operates only upon persons who have wives, and who have wives that have children, have they any mode of enforcing the payment against other persons?-None whatever, but remonstrating publicly with them before the congregation that they have not paid their proportion the same as their neighbours have done.

What is the nature of that public remonstrance ?-Before the congregation they state that such and such persons have paid the assessment that has been laid on them by their neighbours towards the repairs of the house of God, and that such and such other persons withheld their contributions, and the clergyman exhorts them not to withhold any longer.

What is the effect of that remonstrance upon the persons against whom it is directed?-It generally has a very good. effect; they generally contribute to the utmost of their power. What would be the effect upon them if they did not contribute? They would bear it patiently.

Does it imply any exclusion?-No censure, no excommunication, no ecclesiastical punishment whatever is inflicted or apprehended.

On the confession, would not the non-payment of those assessments interfere with the absolution of the penitent?-Never. Does not a remonstrance of this nature expose the individual to some temporal inconveniences? It may be hurtful to his feelings.