Sayfadaki görseller
PDF
ePub

costs remain to be considered by the sessions, who should quash or discharge the order, give a special entry, and decide what costs have been unreasonably incurred (m).

A parish having obtained an order of removal, and served it with notice of chargeability, discovered that from the incorrectness of a date in the examinations they were not able to maintain the order in case of appeal. They got a fresh order of removal from other justices on a correct examination, served it on the appellant parish, with notice of chargeability and of abandoning the first order. The second order was appealed against, on the ground that it was made without jurisdiction, while the first was not superseded, abandoned or discharged; but the contrary was held (n).

A form of supersedeas is given in the note (o).

Anglesea (Justices), both notice of abandonment had been served, and supersedeas obtained.

(m) Coleridge, J., in Reg. v. Brighthelmstone (Directors, &c.). Where on notice of appeal against an order of removal, and after entry of the appeal, the respondents finding their examinations insufficient, gave the appellants notice that they for that reason abandoned the order, and should move at sessions to quash it on a special entry, "Quashed not on the merits;" that they were ready to pay costs of maintenance, and all reasonable costs incurred on the appeal, but that all costs of appeal incurred in future would be at appellants' peril. The appellants gave notice of trying the appeal, and attended the sessions with witnesses. Respondents called none, but moved to quash the order on the above special entry. Appellants claimed to have their witnesses heard or an entry made, either stating in general terms that the order was quashed, or specifying that it was quashed, for insufficiency of the examinations.

Sessions refused to hear appel. lants' witnesses, quashed the order, and made an entry, "Quashed not on the merits," and were held right. Mandamus refused, Pontefract (ex parte Overseers of), 3 Q. B. 391.

(n) Reg. v. St. Pancras (Inh.), 3 Q. B. 347, second order confirmed.

(0) [After reciting order of removal and service of order of removal on appellants] it proceeds :-and whereas the said [pauper] was accordingly removed and conveyed from the said parish of

and

to the said township of delivered to the churchwardens and overseers of the poor there, together with a copy of our said order pursuant to the directions therein contained: and whereas it has been since represented and duly made to appear unto us the said justices that the examination and declaration of the said [pauper] taken upon the making of the said order as aforesaid is not legal evidence of the facts therein stated, but hearsay only, and that therefore the said order is invalid, [or, that pauper was not single and unmarried without child or children at the time of her service with her master, as stated in her said examination and declaration, and therefore did not gain a settlement by such service, but is nevertheless settled in the said parish of by reason of her husband E. F. being legally settled therein.] Therefore we the said justices, upon the application and at the request of the said churchwardens and overseers of - in order

to prevent the expenses of an appeal to the general quarter sessions of the peace for the said county of against the order of removal, do hereby supersede, annul, vacate, and set aside the said order, and do command the said churchwardens and overseers of the poor of the said township respectively to give up and return the said order and the copy thereof to us, that the same may be cancelled and made void to all intents and purposes whatsoever. And we do also require the said churchwardens and overseers of the poor of the said township of to receive back the said

Form of Notice of Abandonment of order of Removal.

To the churchwardens and overseers of -. Take notice, that we hereby abandon the order of A. B. & C. D., esqrs, two of her majesty's justices of the peace for the county of for the removal of J. S. to your parish, a counterpart of which order we sent you on — last past, and we abandon the same on the ground of the examination of the said J. S. (being one of the examinations on which the said order was made, and a copy of which we also sent to you) before defective and bad upon the face thereof [or, as the case may be]. And we hereby offer to pay you all costs and expenses incurred or to be incurred by you in respect of the said order, or of any proceedings towards an appeal against the same, up to the time of your receiving this notice. Dated, &c.

Time of removing Pauper under Order-Sending Notice of Chargeability and Copy of Examination.]-By 4 & 5 W. IV. c. 76, s. 79, no poor person shall be removed or removable (p) under any order of removal (q) from any parish or workhouse, by reason of his being chargeable to or relieved therein, until twenty-one days after a notice in writing (r) of 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 upon which such order was made, shall have

[pauper], and maintain and provide for them until they can free themselves from the charge thereof by due course of law.

Given, &c., day of 184-. (Signed and sealed by the removing justices). (See 2 Q. B. 706, n.; 11 Ad. & E. 809.

(p) It had been held before this act that it was no objection to an order of removal, that the pauper had not been removed for a year after it was made, unless his circumstances had altered in the mean time, R. v. Llanwinio, 4 T. R. 473, for "an order of removal is merely an order to parish officers to take the pauper to the parish indicated, and though it is founded on ex parte examinations of witnesses, the parish may at their discretion abstain from carrying it into execution, because they may either obtain a more accurate knowledge of material facts, or discover some technical defect in the order or examination on which it is issued, or for any other reason. See per Cur. 3 Q. B. 352; 12 L. J. (M. C.) 22, S. C.; see also 8 B. & Cr. 99.

(9) Including suspended orders so as to embrace provisions of s. 79, as to time of notice, see Reg. v. Lancashire, (Js.), 12 L. J. (M.C.) 110. A parish to which notice of removal is sent, is by sect.

79, to have 21 days to consider the expediency of appealing, and in case of such appeal, is by sect. 81, (post, p. 745,) to give 14 days' notice of the grounds of appeal. Held that they need not give that 14 days' notice of the grounds of appeal till the 21 days have elapsed; so that if at the end of the 21 days there do not remain 14 days "at least," i. e. clear days, before the first day of the then next sessions, the appeal need not be made to that sessions, S. C.

(r) Nothing in this section compels notice of appeal to be given 21 days before the sessions, unless their practice requires it, R. v. Suffolk (Justices), 4 Ad. & E. 319; 5 N. & M. 503; but appellants have the whole 21 days to consider whether they will appeal or not, R. v. Suffolk (Js.), and per Patteson, J. R. v. Leicester (Js.), 4 D. P. C. 633. And if at the lapse of 21 days after service of the order, 14 clear days before the first day of the next (actual) sessions do not remain, i. e., the time allowed to deliver the grounds of appeal under sect. 81, the appeal need not be to that sessions, and it will suffice to enter and try at the next sessions after, viz. the second sessions, Reg. v. Lancashire (Js.) 12 L. J. (M. C.) 110; 4 Q. B. 910, S. C.

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.

Though this word" Examination " is in the singular number, it means the whole matter disclosed on the examination before the justices (s), including a heading and jurat to the deposition of each witness (t), so that if all is not sent to the appellant parish, though all that is omitted be a deposition on which the justices did not act, it affords ground of appeal (s). The best course is, that such document produced as an exhibit before the justices should be authenticated by their signatures as having been produced before them, and a copy should be sent to the appellant parish.

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 (u).

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 (x).

Removal to Parish which submits to receive Pauper.]-Provided always, by 4 & 5 W. IV. c. 76, s. 79, 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.

If Notice of Appeal is received in Twenty-one Days, Pauper shall not be Removed.]-Provided also (by same section), 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.

(8) Reg. v. Black Callerton (Inh.), 10 Ad. & E. 679; see id. 704.

(t) Reg. v. Shipston on Stour (Inh.), 13 L. J. (M. C.) 108; 1 New Sess. C. 230, S. C.

(u) Reg. v. Black Callerton, 2 P. & D. 479; 10 Ad. & E. 679.

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

Access to Pauper for Appellants, and his maintenance after Removal.] -By 4 & 5 W. IV. c. 76, s. 80, the overseers or guardians of the parish giving such notice of appeal (z), or their attorney, or any other person authorised by them, shall, until such 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, subject to appeal, as to which see s. 2, infra.

Stat. 3 W. & M. c. 11, (after establishing settlements by hiring and service, apprenticeship, executing an annual public office, and being charged with and paying public taxes or levies of the parish), 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 those cases, 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 corpo

(z) Thus confined to appellants, 11 low, per Patteson, J.

Ad. & E. 611; Reg. v. Ecclesal Bier

rate (a), who, on full hearing of the said appeal, shall have full power finally to determine the same (6).

Parties to 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 (c). However, where there are parish officers, the rated inhabitants cannot appeal independently of them (d). 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 (e). 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 had given an appeal to the party aggrieved (ƒ).

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, s. 6, they were to be tried, "not otherwise or elsewhere." However, 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, must be brought to the borough sessions only (g).

(a) As to this, see post.

(b) 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 made them powerless as to relief.

(c) R. v. Hartfield, Comb. 478; Carthew, 222; and per Littledale, J., Reg. v. Colbeck, supra.

(d) Reg. v. Colbeck, 12 Ad. & E. 161; S. C. 3 P. & D. 488. But the pauper is not a party, within the rule which makes the admissions of a party evidence; for the parishes are the parties, see per Cur. Reg. v. Ecclesal Bierlow, 11 Ad. & E. 607,614. This has been held otherwise where there were no parish officers, R.

v. Denbighshire (Inh.), 1 B. & Adol. 616. See Reg. v. Westmoreland (Justices), 12 L. J. (M. C.) 113.

(e) See R. v. Hardwick (Inh.), 11 East, 584, 586.

(f) R. v. St. Mary-le-bow, 13 East, 51. See Reg. v. Lancashire (Justices), 12 L. J. (M. C.) 110, ante.

(g) Ante, p. 5. In a case which occurred before that act, 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, R. v. Carmarthen (Justices), 4 B. & Ald. 391; 1 Nev. & Man. 368.

« ÖncekiDevam »