state the court to be satisfied that the party is the reputed father of the child (p), without any words of recital, as, "whereas," or the like (q). To state reasons for adjudication is unnecessary, and if they are not sufficient they will vitiate the order (r). A specific sum should be ordered for the maintenance to be allowed, which is not to be for more than six months before making the order, and must be for maintenance only (s). The order, being to indemnify the parish for maintaining the infant, must expressly limit the payment required to such time as the child shall attain the age of seven years; and may properly add, "if the said child shall so long live, and continue to be chargeable to the parish:" for the father may at any time take and maintain it himself (t). An indefinite order to pay so much weekly is bad (u). An order to pay the money to the overseers (or guardians) who make the application, is good (v)..

Costs.]-Though neither petty nor quarter sessions have power to adjudicate that the party charged is not the reputed father (w), they may direct his full costs to be paid, if they do not make the order of filiation; and if, after the overseers have entered an application, no evidence is given in support of it, the sessions are bound to “hear and determine it," so as to give the party charged his costs (x). If the case goes to quarter sessions, and they make an order, the remedy against the party for the costs of the parish officers, &c. is on the recognizance entered into at petty sessions.

Appeal against Order of Bastardy.]-By 4 & 5 W. IV. c. 76, s. 103, it was enacted that, "If any person shall find himself aggrieved by any order made under the provisions of this act [superseded by 2 & 3 V. c. 85, ante, quoad the appeal here given], on such person as the putative father of any bastard child, such person may appeal to

(p) Reg. v. Lewis, 8 Ad. & E. 881; 1 P. & D. 112, S. C.

(q) R. v. Perkasse, 2 Siderfin, 363; R. v. Pitts, Doug. 661.

(r) The single fact of carnal knowledge of a wife by A. during a six years' absence of the husband B. was held a bad reason for inferring A.'s paternity of the wife's child born within that period, in R. v. Browne, Stra. 811.

(s) Thus it will be bad if it be also for putting out apprentice, Comb. 448; but see 1 Barnard. 261.

(t) 1 Burn's J., 28th ed. 375, 376,

any general or quarter sessions of the peace to be held in and for the county, riding, or division in which such order shall have been made, within four calendar months next after the cause of complaint shall have arisen; or if such sessions shall be held before the expiration of one calendar month next after such cause of complaint, then such appeal shall be made to the next following sessions; either of which courts of sessions is empowered to hear and finally determine the matter of the said appeal, and to make such order therein as to them may seem meet; which order shall be final and conclusive to and upon all parties, provided that the person so appealing shall give, or cause to be given, at least (y) fourteen days' notice in writing of his, her, or their intention of appealing as aforesaid, and of the matter and cause thereof, to the respondent; and within five days after such notice shall enter into a recognizance before some justice, with sufficient securities conditioned to try such appeal at the then next general sessions or quarter sessions of the peace which shall first happen, and to abide the order of, and pay such costs as shall be awarded by, the justices at such sessions, or any adjournment thereof." The justices may, by the same section, award such costs to either side as they think proper, and their determination is final.

This clause, as far as regards the appeal against an order of sessions in bastardy, appears to have passed by some oversight; for the justices who made the original order at quarter sessions, while that system prevaded, would not have power to vote on the hearing of an appeal against it, and it might happen that no others would be in attendance when it came on (z). The “matter and cause” of the appeal, as denying that the party accused is the father or had any intercourse with the mother, must be stated in the notice, so that the respondents may know precisely the objections intended to be made to the order(a); and a mere recital of the substance of the order (b) will not satisfy the act.

How far this enactment is inapplicable since 2 & 3 V. c. 85, s. 1, has not yet been decided, but the question was pending in Q. B. Hal. 1841 (c).

An order, good in part, but bad in directing some additional matter,

This seems to mean clear days, see R. v. Derbyshire Justices), 6 Åd. & El. 883, este, p. 995. And see same holding on a similar expression in sect.

$1.

(2) 1 Burn's J., by Chitty, 28th ed.

377.

(4) R. v. Oxfordshire (Justices), 1 B. & C. 279; S. C. 2 D. & R. 426. (R. v. Kaill, 12 East, 50.

e) Reg. v. Yorkshire (Justices, W. R.).

may be quashed as to part, and affirmed as to the rest (d). So it may be amended if erroneous not for want of jurisdiction, but in point of form merely, and so as to proceed on the merits (e). If they affirm the order, their judgment is conclusive, except for matters on the face of the order for which it may be quashed, on removal by certiorari into the queen's bench; and if they quash it on the merits, the appel lant is for ever acquitted (ƒ).

Certiorari.]-A certiorari to remove an order of bastardy made under the old system in force before 4 & 5 W. IV. c. 76, was discharged, not having been applied for within six months (g). If the order was quashed as bad, the court of queen's bench would bind the defendant by recognizance to appear at the next quarter sessions and abide their order (h); for which purpose it was said that he must always be in court at the time of the quashing (i).

Enforcing Order by Distress.]—The goods of the putative father may be distrained and sold, or his wages attached, to pay the weekly sum ordered (j); or he may be indicted for disobeying the order (k). Again, an order confirmed in the queen's bench on certiorari may be enforced by attachment.

Order in Bastardy where Putative Father gives Recognizance of Petty Sessions to obtain a Hearing at Quarter Sessions (2 & 3 V. c. 85; 4 & 5 W. IV. c. 76).

Berkshire, }

At the general quarter sessions of the peace of our lady the Queen, in and for the county of Berks, the

to wit. holden at

day of

in the — year of the reign of our sovereign lady Victoria, the now Queen whereas, the parish of in the said county of Berks is situate within the union of in the said county (7), and such parish and part of such union is situate within the division of - -in the said county; and whereas it has been duly certified, and now appears to this court, that at a petty [or, special, as fact may

(d) Ante, p. 997, n. ; 2 Nol. 312; Comb. 364; i Bott, 468; R. v. Skinn, id. 470.

(e) 1 Burn, 378, 28th ed. If they quash it for want of form, it seems they may make a new order to try the merits, R. v. Periam, 1 Bott, 500.

(f) R. v. Tenant, 2 Ld. Raym. 1423 ; Pridgeon's case, 1 Bulst. 252. (g) R. v. Howlett, 1 Wils. 35. (h) R. v. Gibson, Bla. R. 198. (i) Id.; R. v. Matthews, 2 Salk. 475; R. v. Price, 6 T. R. 147.

(j)4&5W.IV.c.76, s. (qu.) s.76. Ante.

(k) R. v. Robinson, 2 Burr. 799.

(1) Semble, that, where the parish to which the mother of the bastard is chargeable, is one of several parishes composing a union, the notice of application may be given, either by the overseers of that parish or by the guardians of the union, R. v. Wilts (Justices), and Melksham Union (Guardians), Q. B. 26th Nov. 1840, MSS.; and 10 Law Journal, N. S. Mag. Cas. 17, Part I. See Reg. v. James, 10 Ad. & E. 423; 1 Per. & Da. 422, S. C.

be] session holden at

in the said division, on the

day of

now

last past, the guardians of the poor of the said union of ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ did then and there make complaint and application to her majesty's justices of the peace in and for the said county, then and there acting in and for the said division, that on the day of A. D. — (k), one P. M. of the parish of - — aforesaid, single woman, was delivered of a male bastard child, not yet baptized (1), and which said bastard child, by reason of the inability of the mother of such child to provide for its maintenance, became chargeable to the said parish on the ———— (m) day of then and now last, and thenceforth so continued up to and inclusive of the day of making the said complaint and application, and is likely so to continue; and that they the said guardians had made diligent inquiry as to the father of such bastard child, and after such inquiry did charge J. F. of the parish of —————————— in the said county of Berks, with being the putative father of the said bastard child, and did at the said petty session further apply to the said justices for an order upon the said J. F. whom they charged with being the putative father of the bastard child as aforesaid, to reimburse such parish for the maintenance and support of the said child; and whereas it has been also duly certified to this court that the said J. F. the said putative father, having had due notice (n) to appear at the said petty sessions, was then personally present thereat, in pursuance of such notice, and having heard the said complaint, application, and charge of the said guardians, did declare to the said justices at the said petty sessions that he was desirous that the said charge should be heard and determined at the quarter sessions of the peace, and to enter into the recognizance required by the statute in that case made and provided; and the said J. F. did at such petty sessions enter into a recognizance in the sum of 407. with G. F. of the said parish, yeoman, and H. F. of the said parish, yeoman, as his sureties, in the sum of 201. each, conditioned that the said J. F. should personally appear at the present quarter sessions of the peace of the said county, then and there to answer the said charge, and abide the judgment of this

(*) If the child was born on or after 14th August, 1834, and before 26th August, 1839, and has become chargeable since the latter date, it may be well here to add, "and since the passing of an act made and passed in the fifth year of the reign of his late majesty King William the Fourth, intituled, An act for the amendment and better administration of the laws relating to the poor in England and Wales.'"'

(1) Under the circumstances described in the last note, add here, “with respect to which bastard child no application has been made to any court of general quarter sessions under the provisions of the said act."

(m) Patteson, J., has held that the time when the chargeability accrued need not be stated so as to test the application as made in proper time, R. v. Hants (Justices), Practice Court of Q. B. Mich. 1840, MSS. 18th Nov.; and see

Reg. v. Lewis, 8 Ad. & E. 881. The same learned judge held, that the mother's settlement in the parish need not be stated. See as to alleging the birth to have been in the parish under the old law, R. v. Sweet, 9 East, 25.

(n) Sufficient, where the party has appeared and given recognizance at petty sessions; though the service of seven days' notice to appear at the petty sessions was not proved, either there or at the quarter sessions, or on affidavit on resisting motion for certiorari:—for his appearance at the petty sessions, waived the right to such proof; nor, after he had given recognizance, was it necessary to give him notice to appear at the quarter sessions, R. v. Wilts (Justices) and Melksham Union (Guardians), ante, p. 996, per Patteson, J.

Objections to the notice should be taken at petty sessions, per Littledale, J., S. C.

court, and pay all the costs incurred by the said guardians in bringing such charge before this court, in case the said court should adjudge him be the putative father of the said bastard child; whereupon the said justices in such petty sessions assembled did not proceed further to hear the said charge, but having taken such recognizance, transmitted the same to this court to the clerk of the peace (o). And whereas the said J. F. has personally appeared before this court in pursuance of his said recognizance (p). Now, this court having taken the further proceedings in the matter of such charge, and having examined into the cause and circumstances of the premises, and it being now proved in the presence and hearing of the said J. F. (9), that the said child was, on the said day of A. D. -, born a bastard of the body of the said P. M., and that the said child, on the

day of now last past, by reason of the inability of its said mother to provide for its maintenance, became, and from thence hitherto hath been, and still is, chargeable to the said parish of and it being also proved upon oath, in the presence and hearing of the said J. F., as well by the evidence of the said P. M. the mother of the said child, as upon other testimony of corroborating her evidence in material particulars (r), to the satisfaction (s) of this court, that the said J. F. is the father of the said child, and having heard all the evidence in this behalf adduced, and having heard the said parties, and the arguments of counsel (t), as well on behalf of the said guardians as of the said J. F., this court doth adjudge that the said J. F. is the putative father of the said bastard child, and doth therefore order that the said J. F. do forthwith pay to the guardians of the said union the sum of 11s. expended by the said union for the maintenance and support of the said child, from the said [day of birth] to the present time; and that he do also pay to the guardians of the said union weekly, and every week, from henceforth until the said child shall attain the age of seven years, if the child shall so long live and continue to be chargeable to the said parish of —, such sum and sums of money as shall be weekly expended by and on behalf of the said union, for the maintenance and support of the said child during the time last aforesaid, not exceeding the sum of 28. in each and every week (u).

By the Court.

GEORGE BOWES MORLAND, Clerk of the Peace.

(0) In R. v. Hants (Justices), 10 Law J. (N. S.) Part I. Mag. Ca. 22, n. supra, an order of quarter sessions made since 2 & 3 V. c. 85, and couched in the old form, was held bad by Patteson, J., for not alleging the circumstances which gave that court jurisdiction, viz. inter alia, the transmitting the recognizance.

(P) If he does not appear, say, "and whereas the said J. F. hath not appeared." See 4 & 5 W. IV. c. 76, s. 74. Semb. the party cannot now appear by his attorney.

(4) If not present, omit this.

(r) Semble, a single material particular would suffice, Reg. v. Read, 1 P. & D. 413, Hil. 1839.

(*) Sufficient. See Reg. v. Lewis, 8

Ad. & E. 881; S. C. 1 Per. & Da. 112; and see 4 & 5 W. IV. c. 76, s. 72.

(t) If the putative father is absent, or counsel are not heard, mould this accordingly.

(u) Where the order proceeded to state, that the court had ascertained that the costs incurred by the guardians of an union in bringing the charge before the court amounted to a sum named, and adjudged that the putative father should on sight of the order pay that sum forthwith to the guardians, or E. B. their attorney on that occasion, a certiorari was granted to bring it up to be quashed as to this latter part only, for as the sum to be paid for maintenance was separately adjudicated, the rest of the order was confirmed, ante, p. 996.