the Commissioners of paving, and the borough council, the respective amounts payable to those bodies.

The Poor Law Commissioners, under stat. 7 & 8 Vict. c. 101, s. 32, made an order, combining this corporation, by the title of "The Corporation of the Poor of the City of Bristol," with certain unions into a district for the audit of accounts. The auditor appointed for the district required the Corporation to render an account of all moneys, matters, and things committed to their charge, or received, held, or expended by them as Governor, &c. The Corporation refusing to attend the audit, a mandamus issued, calling upon them to account in the terms of the auditor's request. Held, by the Court of Queen's Bench, and by the Exchequer Chamber, affirming the judgment of that Court,

That the Poor Law Commissioners had power to include the city of Bristol in a district for the audit of accounts, as it was a union within stat. 7 & 8 Vict. c. 101, s. 32, and sect. 109 of stat. 4 & 5 W. 4, c. 76; and that the power was well exercised, in substance, though the Corporation of the Governor, &c., was combined in the district, and not the city itself, or the parishes contained in it, and the Corporation itself was incorrectly described.

That the request of the auditor, and the mandatory part of the writ, were not too large, as requiring the Corporation to account for all moneys received and expended; because the auditor was entitled to know the amount of all moneys raised and paid, in order to ascertain the balance applicable to the relief of the poor.

Semble, also, that, under stat. 4 & 5 W. 4, c. 76, s. 105, the order of the Poor Law Commissioners was valid until brought up by certiorari and quashed. Regina v. Bristol, Governor of Poor, 405

IV. Incorporation under local act: dissolution. 1. Conduct from which dissolution by consent of majority of guardians may be inferred. Replevin (declaration, April, 1847), by the Guardians of the Woodbridge poor law union, against defendants described as the Corporation of Guardians of the poor of C. Avowry, for rent due to defendants at Michaelmas, 1846, for a workhouse held by plaintiffs, as tenants to defendants under demise at a yearly rent. Plea, that defendants did not hold, &c., modo et formâ. Issue thereon.

On a special case, with liberty to the Court to draw inferences as a jury, it was found that the Guardians of C. were incorporated by a local act, 30 G. 3, c. 22, for relief of the poor of certain parishes, and that the workhouse, and all furniture, &c., purchased by them under former acts were vested in them for the uses in this act mentioned. That, on VOL. XIII.-80

trial of the cause, evidence was offered of an order made in 1835, by the Poor Law Commissioners, under stat. 4 & 5 W. 4, c. 76, s. 32, reciting consent of the Guardians to a dissolution of the Incorporation, and ordering it to be dissolved. That by an order, made immediately afterwards, the Commissioners, acting under stat. 4 & 5 W. 4, c. 76, s. 26, established the Woodbridge Union, comprising, among others, the parishes, twenty-eight in number, formerly governed under the local act; from which time the Guardians of the C. Incorporation ceased to act in the relief of the poor, and that business, in the twentyeight parishes, was administered by the Woodbridge Guardians. That the workhouse, before the order for dissolution, was used by the C. Incorporation for the reception of their poor, but afterwards was occupied as a union house for the Woodbridge Union. That, from the making of that order till April, 1846, the Woodbridge Union paid to the treasurer of the C. Incorporation 2217. by half-yearly payments, at Lady-day and Michaelmas, which, until 1838, were styled "rent" in the checks so paid. That, in 1838, the Woodbridge Guardians paid a balance for furniture and fixtures in the workhouse. That, after that time, the word "rent" was not used in the checks. That, in 1841, the Commissioners made an order under stat. 5 & 6 W. 4, c. 69, s. 3, reciting the establishment of the Woodbridge Union by their last preceding order, and reciting also that the workhouse belonging to the C. Incorporation thereupon became convertible to the common use of the Woodbridge Union, and had been used accordingly; and the order directed the Woodbridge Guardians to pay out of the Union funds to the treasurer of the Incorporation as compensation for the use and occupation of the said workhouse, while such use, &c., should continue for Union purposes, or till further order of the Commissioners, 2217. yearly, by half-yearly payments, to commence from the preceding Michaelmas; such payments to be applied by the treasurer, first in discharge of certain securities, given by the Guardians of the Incorporation, and then as the Commissioners should order. And that the securities were discharged accordingly. Held,

1. That the order of dissolution was admissible in evidence. For, supposing that the plaintiffs, having sued the defendants as a corporation, would have been estopped from setting up the order if its effect had been entirely to destroy the Incorporation, that estoppel did not arise here, as the order did not destroy the Incorporation for all purposes: And, after the lapse of eleven years, a jury might have inferred from the conduct of parties, and the use made of the workhouse since the first order of 1835, without more direct

evidence, that a majority of the Guardians of C. Incorporation had consented, as stat. 4 & 5 W. 4, c. 76, s. 32, requires, to a dissolution of their union.

2. That a jury might have inferred, from the facts stated, that the half-yearly payments, after the order of 1841, were made, not under an actual or supposed contract of tenancy, but under authority of law:

And, Held, consequently, that the plaintiffs were entitled to recover. Woodbridge, Guardians, v. Colneis,

269

2. Partial dissolution, 269. Ante, 1. 3. Rights as regards the Poor Law Union with which the parishes are incorporated, 269. Ante, 1.

V. Governing body under local act.

1. When the proper appellants against an order of removal.

By a local act, 7 G. 4, c. cxxi., the vestrymen of St. George, Hanover Square, were directed annually to appoint twenty persons, who, with the rector, churchwardens, and overseers for the time being, should be governors and directors of the poor, and have the sole care and management of the said poor. Various powers for the management and cure of the poor, in the workhouse and otherwise, were given them by other clauses: and it was enacted that any three or more of them might exercise any of the powers given them by the local act.

No independent authority in the care or management of the poor was given to the churchwardens and overseers; but the overseers, with the vestry, were to make the poor rates.

Held that, after as well as before, the passing of stat. 4 & 5 W. 4, c. 76, and independently of that act, the governors and directors were the proper parties to appeal against an order of removal: and that, under the local act and sect. 81 of stat. 4 & 5 W. 4, c. 76 (explained, as to the word "guardians,” by sect. 109), a statement of grounds of appeal signed by three governors and directors, and by no other person, was good.

And that such appeal ought to have been allowed by the Sessions, though the order of removal was addressed only to the churchwardens and overseers, and though a case, submitted by the Sessions to this Court, recited the appeal as preferred by the churchwardens and overseers, not mentioning any other appellant.

An order of removal, made after the passing of stat. 9 & 10 Vict. c. 66, need not state that the pauper had not resided in the parish for five years next before the application for an order to remove. Regina v. St. George, Hanover Square,

642

2. Who to sign grounds of appeal, 642. Ante, 1.

.3. Select vestry with special provisions as to mode of meeting, 687. Post, XVII.

Who are, within stat. 4 & 5 W. 4, c. 76, sects, 79, 81, 642. Ante, V. 1.

VII. District maintaining its own poor.
1. What not a parish or reputed parish.

On a question whether a district, anciently part of a parish, was entitled to have separate overseers, and to levy separate poor rates, either under stat. 13 & 14 C. 2, c. 12, s. 21, as being otherwise unable to have the benefit of stat. 43 Eliz. c. 2, or as being itself a parish or reputed parish within stat. 43 Eliz. c. 2, the sessions stated the following facts for the opinion of the Court, submitting it to the Court to draw such inferences from them as a jury might draw:

The district has a boundary well defined, lies at the extremity of the parish, is 2135 acres in extent, has a population of 700 persons, and is distant about nine miles from the parish church; the parish, exclusive of the district, is 8020 acres in extent, and has a population of 1600 persons. Before the dissolution of the Monasteries, the district had a chapel with a chantry and endowment of lands. The chapel and lands were granted by the Crown, in 31 Eliz., to trustees on certain trusts, in execution of which they had ever since nominated the minister of the chapel for license by the bishop, and paid over the profits of the lands to such minister, without interference by the vicar of the parish. The chapel, before 43 Eliz., had all parochial rights and sacraments, and two churchwardens, and its own burial ground. The district has never contributed to the repairs of the parish church; has always had separate surveyors of highways, and a separate highway rate, and has not contributed to the parish highways; and has always had a constable. The titheable lands of the district have always paid tithes to the vicar; the minister of the district chapel is supported by the above-mentioned endowment, but has no tithes.

With respect to the maintenance of the poor: the earliest known appointment of an overseer for the district was an appointment of one in 1738. This appointment of a single overseer was continued until 1785, when two were appointed; and there have been two ever since. Separate poor rates have always been made for the parish and the district; and the poor in each have been maintained separately as to out-door relief. The amount in the pound raised has always been the same in both parish and district; the district either taking the amount already fixed by the parish, or consulting the parish as to the amount, accordingly as the district rate was made before or after the parish rate. There was no

workhouse in the district; but its poor were sent for in-door relief to the parish workhouse, and there maintained out of the parish rate. At the end of the year, the officers of the parish and district settled accounts, and whichever had money beyond its own expenditure handed the balance to the other. The accounts of the district, after allowance by its own vestry, were submitted to the parish vestry for allowance; but not vice versâ. Held,

That the district was not entitled to have separate overseers, either under stat. 13 & 14 C. 2, c. 12, s. 21, or as having been a parish or reputed parish at the time of the passing of stat. 43 Eliz. c. 2. Regina v. Clayton, 354 2. What not a parish which cannot have the benefit of stat. 43 Eliz. c. 2, 354. Ante, 1. Re363

3. Poor law commissioners cannot alter. gina v. Clayton,

VIII. Union.

What is, 405. Ante, III.

IX. Audit district.

What union and districts may be united, 405. Ante, III.

X. Auditor.

1. Effect of his having a direct interest in the accounts audited.

One of the partners in a firm, acting as attorneys for a parish, was duly appointed auditor of the Union comprising that parish, and acted as such until, on the passing of stat. 7 & 8 Vict. c. 101, he became auditor of the district comprising that parish. It was known that he was a partner in the firm; and for some time no objection was made to his acting as auditor, though in doing so he had to allow or disallow bills of costs of his own firm. The objection was at last taken. The auditor, after an unsuccessful attempt to have the audit, as to these bills, conducted by a stranger (which the Poor law Commissioners would not sanction), held an audit himself, though with the assistance of a disinterested party that party, however, not acting formally as assessor. The auditor, during such audit, allowed several bills of costs belonging to his own firm. The accounts and allowances being brought up by certiorari: on a motion to quash them:

Held, that the auditor, being duly appointed and having accepted the office, was bound to fulfil its duties, and therefore that the audit was not void, though the auditor had a direct interest in the accounts.

Amongst the items allowed were the costs of a litigation (in support of rates irregularly made) which, in the opinion of the Court, was unnecessary and improper, though the litigation was bonâ fide, carried on under the advice of counsel, and sanctioned by the vestry.

Held, that these items ought not to have been allowed: and the auditor's allowance of them was quashed. Regina v. Great Western Railway Company, 327

2. What account he may require of money applicable to other rates and purposes, 405, Ante, III.

3. Disallowance of retrospective expenses. 524. Post, XII. 1.

4. Improper allowances by, how rectified.

The parishes of W. and H., in the union of D. adjoined each other. The relieving officer of the union, under stat. 8 & 9 Vict. c. 126 s. 49, obtained a warrant to bring A., a lunatic, before two justices; he met him in parist. W., and there took him into custody, and brought him thence before two justices, whe sent him to the asylum. By a subsequent order, the justices, reciting that they had sent the lunatic to the asylum as a "wandering" lunatic, ordered the treasurer of the union to pay the charges. The guardians of the unior directed their treasurer to pay, and to debi parish W.; which he did; and the auditor allowed the charge. His accounts and allowances, with the reasons, were, at the instanc: of parish W., brought up by certiorari unde: stat. 7 & 8 Vict. c. 101; and it appeared on affidavit that, although the order was draw up as if the lunatic was wandering, he was ir fact living with his relatives in the parish of H. They were persons of some substance; and he was not chargeable to any parish: but the relieving officer acted on the complair: of the clergyman of H. that the lunatic was neglected.

Held, that, under stat. 8 & 9 Vict. c. 126, s. 57, the lunatic, though not actually a pau. per, was chargeable to the parish of H.; and that the debiting of W. was an error, whic the auditor should have corrected. And the Court made a rule absolute, that the allow. ance should be quashed, parish H. repay th charges to parish W., and the costs of paris W. be borne by the union. Regina v. Winsford,

XI. Union and district accounts.

873

1. Audit by interested auditor, 327. Ante, X. 1.

2. Costs of improper litigation, 327. Ante, X. 1.

3. Costs on certiorari, 327. Ante, X. 1. 4. Mandamus to account, 405. Ante, III. XII. Overseers' accounts: past expenditure. 1. Attorneys' bills running through several

years.

It is a principle of rating that the rats shall not be imposed to reimburse for pas expenses: but the rule is subject to necessary exceptions.

Attorneys were employed by the overseers of a parish, during 1844-5 and 1845-6, in pa

rochial business. Some of the business ran continuously from one year into the other; but the greater part was done and concluded within 1844-5 and 1845-6 respectively. Poor rates were made half-yearly, in January and in July or August: the overseers went out of office and made up their accounts in March. In August, 1846, the attorneys delivered their bill, not having before that time delivered any bill, or demanded or received any payment. No special cause appeared for the delay. The overseers for 1846-7 paid the whole sum and charged it in their accounts. The auditor disallowed part of such charge, consisting of items not running continuously from year to year, on the ground that the rates in hand during 1846-7 were charged with the payment of these sums retrospectively.

On motion to quash the disallowance on certiorari under stat. 7 & 8 Vict. c. 101, s. 35, it appeared that, of the amount disallowed, 491. was for business done in the year ending March, 1845; and 2017. was partly for business between March 25th, 1845, and January 1st, 1846, and partly for business between the end of 1845 and March, 1846. The overseers leaving office in March, 1845, had handed over 457., rates of their year, to their successors and left an amount uncollected, much exceeding the attorneys' costs then due. The overseers of 1845-6 handed over 11. and left an amount uncollected, also much exceeding the costs then due. The overseers of 1846-7 collected as much of the outstanding rates as, with the sum handed over, exceeded the aggregate of costs due. The sum so collected they applied to current expenses; but they made a half-yearly rate at the end of July, 1846, out of which they paid the bills of costs. Held that the 491. was rightly disallowed; but the Court quashed the disallowance as to the 2011. Regina v. Read,

524

2. Effect of receiving balance from predecessors, 524. Ante, 1.

XIII. Vestry.

1. Its sanction of improper litigation, 327. Ante, X. 1.

2. Under local act, 642. Ante, V. 1. 687. Post, XVII.

Legality of rate by vestrymen de facto, 687. Post, XVII. 1.

4. Sée VESTRY.

XIV. Workhouse.

1. Of a previous local incorporation: compensation for use of, 269. Ante, IV. 1.

2. Locality in a different parish, 964. Post, XXII. 1.

XV. Costs.

Of unnecessary litigation, 327. Ante, X. 1. XVI. Lunatics: wandering or neglected.

To what parishes chargeable, 873. Ante,
X. 4.

XVII. Rate: preliminary notices, and proceedings at the time of making.

Rate commenced at meeting with notice, completed at adjournment without notice.

By the St. Pancras select vestry act, 59 G. 3, c. xxxix. s. 69, the vestrymen, or any seven or more of them, were empowered and required from time to time to meet for the purpose of making a poor rate, notice of such meeting and the purpose thereof being first given, and at such meeting or meetings to make one or more rates for relief of the poor, &c.; and all such rates, when signed by the said vestrymer or any seven, &c., and allowed, &c., by two justices, were to be collected, &c. Py sect. 4 the vestrymen were authorized, at any meeting, to adjourn themselves to meet at such future time and such place as they should appoint, &c.; notice of such adjourned meeting being given to every vestryman.

An avowry for a distress under warrant to levy a poor rate for St. Pancras stated: That a vestry meeting was held on 12th August, 1839, for the purpose of making a poor rate, notice of such meeting, and of the purpose thereof, having been duly given: That, at such meeting, a certain poor rate was unanimously agreed upon and made: That, after the making of the said rate, to wit, on 14th September, 1839, a certain other meeting of the vestrymen was held, the vestrymen assembled at the former meeting having adjourned themselves to meet on this day, and notice of the said adjourned meeting (not adding, "and of the purpose thereof") having been given to every vestryman. That, at such last-mentioned meeting, the rate so agreed upon and made at the former meeting was signed by eight vestrymen who had been present at such former meeting. It was also averred that, after the making of the said rate, a special meeting of the vestrymen was summoned (with proper notice), and held on 28th August, 1839, and at such meeting (the same being the next meeting subsequent to that first mentioned) the said rate, so agreed upon and made at the first meeting, was confirmed by the vestrymen present. Allowance and publication of the rate were also averred. Replication De injuriâ.

It was proved that, at the meeting of 12th August, notice of which, and of the purpose, had been duly given, the vestry resolved that a poor rate of 18. in the pound be made and laid, &c., "and the said rate is hereby made and laid accordingly:" but nothing was done beyond passing such resolution; and the vestry adjourned to September 4th, when they met for other business and adjourned to the 9th, when they again transacted other busi