Sayfadaki görseller
PDF
ePub

his being so chargeable or relieved, accompanied by a copy or counterpart of the order of removal of such person, and by a copy of the examination (c) upon which such order was made, shall have been sent by post or otherwise by the overseers or guardians of the parish obtaining such order, or any three or more of such guardians, to the overseers of the parish to whom such order shall be directed.

The whole of the examination taken before the justices should be sent, and not that part only on which the examination is founded; and if all is not sent it is a ground of appeal (d).

If the copy of examinations served omits to state that the pauper was chargeable to the removing parish, the defect will not be cured by service of the notice of his chargeability also required by sect. 79. Order of removal quashed on that ground (e).

If the written notice of chargeability is not served at the same time with the copy of the order of removal, the parish to which the removal is made may make the omission a ground of appeal against the order (ƒ).

Notice of an order of removal was served 8th June, 1836. Next sessions began June 28th. Their practice required fourteen days' notice of appeal. No notice of appeal being given within twenty-one days after copy of order sent to appellant parish (under 4 & 5 W. IV. c. 76, s. 79), the pauper was removed on June 29. Notice of appeal, and of the grounds thereof, was served on the removing parish in time for the October sessions. Held, that an appeal lay to those sessions (g), and comm, semb. on the ground that the parish was not aggrieved till the actual removal of the pauper (h).

An order of removal was served on 18th March; the next sessions were held 8th April. Seven days' notice of appeal was required by practice of the sessions. Williams, J., held, that since sect. 79 the Midsummer sessions following was the next practicable sessions for the purpose of appealing; for the parish, on 18th March, had twenty-one days to judge whether it would appeal against the order. Within that time, viz. on 4th April, they resolved to do so. That was too late to give the seven days' notice for the April sessions, and it was unnecessary to enter and respite there (i).

(c) As to the sufficiency of the statement in the examination, see R. v. Kelvedon (Inh.), post, p. 729.

(d) R. v. Outwell (Inh.), 9 Ad. & E. 836; 1 P. & D. 610, S. C.

(e) Reg. v. Black Callerton, 2 P. & D. 479.

(f) Reg. v. Brixham (Inh.), 8 Ad. & E. 375; 3 Nev. & Per. 408.

[blocks in formation]

Notice of appeal against an order of removal was regularly given under sect. 79: but no proceeding was taken on it, and the pauper was not actually removed till nearly a year after. The appellant then gave a fresh notice of appeal against the actual removals, under stat. 13 & 14 C. II. c. 12. The sessions refused to hear the appeal. Patteson, J., held that the first notice of appeal was valid. On the question, Whether the appellant parish was by such notice precluded from giving a second against the actual removal? Patteson, J., said, that if the original notice had been effectually followed up, and the case decided, and a new attempt at appeal were then made after the actual removal, he thought the sessions would be right in refusing to hear that appeal, as the case would have been in fact already decided. He did not, however, find any thing in stat. 4 W. IV. which prevented the appellants from expressly or tacitly waiving that notice, and having recourse to the proceeding they were entitled to adopt under stat. C. II. Rule absolute for mandamus to hear the case (j).

Removal to Parish which submits to receive Pauper.]-Provided always, that if such overseers or guardians as last aforesaid, or any three or more of such guardians, shall, by writing under their hands, agree to submit to such order, and to receive such poor person, it shall be lawful to remove such poor person according to the tenor of such order, although the said period of twenty-one days may not have elapsed (k).

If Notice of Appeal is received in Twenty-one Days, Pauper shall not be Removed.]-Provided also, that if notice of appeal against such order of removal shall be received by the overseers or guardians of the parish from which such poor person is directed in such order to be removed, within the said period of twenty-one days, it shall not be lawful to remove such poor person until after the time for prosecuting such appeal shall have expired, or in case such appeal shall be duly prosecuted, until after the final determination of such appeal (1).

Access to Pauper for Appellants.]-By 4 & 5 W. IV. c. 76, s. 80, the overseers or guardians of the parish giving such notice of appeal, or their attorney or any other person authorized by them, shall, until such

(j) R. v. Middlesex (Justices), Mich. 1840, Practice Court of Q. B.

(k) 4 & 5 W. IV. c. 76, s. 79.
(7) As to this, see post, p. 720, 721.

appeal shall have been heard and decided, have free access to such poor person at all proper times, for the purpose of examining him touching his settlement; and in case it shall be necessary for the more effectual examination of such person, that he should be taken out of the removing parish, such overseers or guardians shall be permitted to remove him therefrom for the time which may be necessary for that purpose provided always, that the expense of such removal, and of his maintenance during the same, shall be defrayed by the appellant parish.

SECTION II.

OF THE RIGHT OF APPEAL AGAINST AN ORDER OF REMOVAL, AND TO WHAT SESSIONS; AND HEREIN, OF THE NOTICE OF APPEAL, STATEMENT OF GROUNDS OF APPEAL, AND OTHER MATTERS NECESSARY TO THE REGULAR EXERCISING OF THAT RIGHT.

HAVING already considered the law relating to appeals in general, we will now review the law more particularly applicable to appeals against orders of justices for removal of poor persons to their respective places of settlement.

Enactments conferring Appeal.]-By 13 & 14 C. II. c. 12, s. 1, two justices are empowered by their warrant to remove parties to their last legal settlements. Provided (sect. 2), that all such persons who think themselves aggrieved by any such judgment of the said two justices, may appeal to the justices of peace of the said county, at their next quarter sessions.

Stat. 3 W. & M. c. 11, after establishing several kinds of settlement, enacts, by sect. 9, that if any person or persons shall find himself or themselves aggrieved by any determination which any justice or justices of the peace shall make in any of the cases aforesaid, the said person or persons shall have liberty to appeal to the next general quarter sessions of the peace to be held for the said county, riding, or division, city or town corporate (1), who, on full hearing of the said appeal, shall have full power finally to determine the same (m).

(1) As to this, see post.

(m) There never was any appeal against an order of justices for relief, R. v. Devon (Justices), 4 M. & S. 421;

R. v. North Shields, Doug. 331; Cald. 68, S. C. The new poor law has now placed relief on a different footing.

Who may Appeal against an Order of Removal.]-All persons aggrieved by an order of removal, viz. not only the parish officers of the parish to which the pauper is removed, but the pauper himself, may appeal against it (n). However, where there are parish officers, the rated inhabitants cannot appeal independently of them (o). Appeals of this kind, though technically carried on in the names of the parish officers, are yet in substance and effect the suits of the parishioners themselves, who are to contribute to the maintenance of the paupers, so that the parishioners are the real, and their officers the nominal parties (p). In cases where the order has been suspended, and a subsequent order made for the payment of costs under 20., pursuant to 35 G. III. c. 101, an appeal lies for the latter, as a grievance to the parish, notwithstanding the death of the pauper previous to the removal; and this, though the grievance complained of did not exist till after 3 W. & M. c. 11, s. 9 gave an appeal to the party aggrieved (9).

To what Sessions, in respect of Place, Appeal must be.]—Appeals against orders of removal were directed by 13 & 14 C. II. c. 12, s. 2, to be carried to the next quarter sessions of the county in which the orders were made, and by 8 & 9 W. III. c. 30, they were to be tried, "not otherwise or elsewhere." The question whether, since the municipal corporation act, 5 & 6 W. IV. c. 76, appeals against such orders made in boroughs, not being counties of themselves, and having separate sessions of the peace, should be brought to the borough sessions only, is treated of in the first chapter of this work (r). In a case which occurred before 5 & 6 W. IV. c. 76, on an order of removal made in a town being a county of itself, where general sessions were held twice a year only, it was decided that the appeal should be to the next of such general sessions (s). And next,

To what Sessions, in respect of Time, Appeal must be-And herein of Suspended Orders, and Entering and Respiting.]-Every order of removal being an ex parte proceeding only, of which the parish to

(n) R. v. Hartfield, Carthew, 222; and per Littledale, J., Reg. v. Colbeck, 3 P. & D. 488.

(0) Reg. v. Colbeck, 3 P. & D. 488. This has been held otherwise where there were no parish officers, R. v. Denbighshire (Inh.), 1 B. & Adol. 616.

(p) See R. v. Hardwick (Inh.), 11

East, 584, 586. See acts enabling them
to give evidence. Ante, p. 557, 558.
(q) R. v. St. Mary-le-bow, 13 East,

51.

(r) Ante, p. 3.

(s) R. v. Carmarthen (Justices), 4 B. & Ald. 391; 1 Nev. & Man. 368.

which the removal is to take place cannot know any thing till it actually occurs (t), that parish must appeal to the next practicable sessions after they are "aggrieved." That grievance does not accrue from the date of the order, whatever it may be, and though a sessions has intervened; but from that of the actual removal of the pauper to the parish named in the order (u). This continues to be the law since the poor law amendment act, though under that act the parish may in certain events be required to pay costs and expenses (v). In case of an order of suspension by reason of the sickness of the pauper, or any of his family, the time for appealing against such order shall be computed according to the rules which govern other like cases from the time of serving such order, and not from the time of making the removal, under and by virtue of the same (w). If after such suspension the pauper dies before actual removal made, the appeal is to the next practicable session after demand of the charges (x). And if in the last case the parish was exposed to a distress, by not having given notice of appeal within three days after such demand, it is not estopped from giving notice of appeal to the next session (y).

Where an order of removal was suspended under 35 G. III. c. 101, and no actual removal took place for five years, and two services of the order made in the interval were both bad, one being of a copy only without showing the original order, and the other being of a copy only, though authenticated by the justices who made the original, it was held that the appeal was in time notwithstanding the above acts, though not entered till the next session after the removal (z). As the suspended order, if not executed before the death of the pauper, becomes of course a nullity, against which no appeal can be made (a), should no notice of the order have been served in a reasonable time after the making it, notice of the order should be served as soon as possible after it is made, though a year appears not too long a time for such service, if the circumstances of the pauper have not changed in the interval(b), e. g. by succeeding to an estate in the removing parish, and thereby

[blocks in formation]
« ÖncekiDevam »