Page images
PDF
EPUB

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.

[ocr errors]

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.

VI. Guardians.

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

[ocr errors]

VIII. Union.

What is, 405. Ante, III.

IX. Audit district.

Re363

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 under 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 pauper, 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 the charges to parish W., and the costs of paris W. be borne by the union. Regina v. Winsford, 872

XI. Union and district accounts.

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 severa! 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.

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

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

siness and adjourned to the 14th. Notice was given of all the adjourned meetings, but not of the purpose of any of them. A meeting was duly held in the mean-time, on the 28th August, not by adjournment, but by special summons, authorized by the local act, for business relative to the workhouse; and the minutes of the vestry meeting at which the rate had been resolved upon were then confirmed, as stated in the avowry. On September 14th, it was resolved that the rate books, which had been made out since the former meeting, should be signed by the vestrymen, and they signed the books, by writing their names at the foot of the declaration required by stat. 6 & 7 W. 4, c. 96, s. 2. The rate was duly allowed, &c. Some of the vestrymen who attended at the original meeting of the 12th of August and the several adjourned meetings, and who took part in the business transacted at these meetings, and who signed the rate books, were vestrymen de facto only, having been illegally elected. On these facts, stated in a special case, with the question "whether or not they sustained the avowry?"—

Held, by the Court of Queen's Bench, that no rate was in fact made on the 12th August. And that the rate could not be considered as made on the 14th September, or on the two days or either of them by the joint effect of the meetings held on each, there having been no direct adjournment from 12th August to 14th September, and no proper notice having been given that the meeting on the latter day was for the purpose of making a rate. And that, independently of this defect in proof, the signing on September 14th, of a rate only resolved upon by the vestry on August 12th, did not support the allegation that a rate made on the last-mentioned day was signed on September 14th.

Held, by the Court of Exchequer Chamber, on Error, reversing the judgment of the Court of Queen's Bench:

That the allegation, in the avowry, that a rate was made at the meeting on the 12th August, was proved by the fact found, that the rate was begun at that meeting and completed on the 14th September, to which day the meeting was duly adjourned by successive adjournments; because all these meetings in law constituted one.

That no notice of the purpose of the adjourned meetings was necessary.

That the allegation, that the rate was signed at "a certain other meeting" on the 14th September, was also proved, because, though that meeting continued to be the same as the meeting of 12th August until the rate was completed, it might be treated as a different meeting at the time of signing the rate after it had been completed.

That the rate made by vestrymen de facts. was valid.

That the rate was well signed, for that the signatures to the declaration at the foot of the rate, under stat. 6 & 7 W. 4, c. 96, s. 2, answered also the purpose of signatures to the rate itself under the local act. Scadding v. Lorant, 687

XVIII. Rate: by whom made.

By vestrymen de facto, 687. Ante, XVII. XIX. Rate: form.

1. Course to be taken by overseers on finding that a rate is bad in point of form, 327, 339. Ante, X. 1.

2. In several volumes, 687, 703. Ante, XVII. XX. Rate: signature.

1. Double purpose served by signature to the declaration, 687. Ante, XVII.

2. By what vestrymen, 687. Ante, XVII. XXI. Rate: purpose.

Exceptions to the rule as to past expenses, 524. Ante, XII. 1.

XXII. Rateable property: exemptions by statute. 1. When kept alive notwithstanding repeal.

By an act, 22 G. 3, c. 56, trustees for the parish of St. Luke were empowered to purchase land in the parish of St. Leonard, Shoreditch, for the purpose of building a workhouse thereon for their own parish; and (sect. 11) the land and any workhouse to be built thereon, were not to be rated more highly to the poor, while used and occupied for the above purpose, than the lands and hereditaments to be purchased were rated at the time of purchase. Land was taken accordingly, and a workhouse built thereon in 1782, and used from thenceforth for the poor of St. Luke's. Sect. 14 enacted that persons born in or received into the workhouse should not therefore become chargeable to St. Leonard's, but should have the same settlement as if the workhouse had been in St. Luke's.

By stat. 48 G. 3, c. xcvii. s. 1, the former act was repealed: by other clauses, provision was made for appointing guardians of the poor for St. Luke's; and, a later section (74) enacted that all workhouses, lands, &c., which the trustees under the former act were entitled to in trust for the parishioners or for the relief of the poor, should be vested in and possessed by the guardians under this act ae fully, effectually, and beneficially, and in as large and ample manner and form, and to all intents and purposes whatsoever, as the former trustees were entitled to or possessed of the same, or as the same were vested in such trustees; but subject to be used, possessed. &c., only upon the trust, and for the uses, &c., and in the manner by this act directed.

Stat. 53 G. 3, c. cxii., directed the parish.

ioners of St. Leonard's to meet four times a year, and ascertain the amount of poor rate requisite for the current quarter; and, within a given time after each meeting, to make a poor rate not exceeding the amount previously ascertained, which rate should be laid upon all persons who did and should occupy any land, house, &c., tenement, or hereditament within the parish, and should be laid according to the annual rent or value of such lands, &c.

Held that, notwithstanding the general words of repeal in stat. 48 G. 3, c. xcvii., the 74th section of that act kept alive the exemption from increased rating, given by stat. 22 G. 3, c. 56, s. 11, as well as the provision against alteration of settlement in sect. 14 of the same act.

And that the exemption in sect. 11 was not repealed by the general words of stat. 53 G. 3, c. cxii. Regina v. St. Leonard's, Shoreditch,

961

2. When not repealed by general words, 964. Ante, 1.

XXIII. Rateable property: exemption of property occupied solely for public purposes. What purposes of local convenience do not exempt: waterworks.

By certain local acts Commissioners were authorized to purchase lauds, and construct reservoirs, and lay down pipes for the purpose of supplying the town and neighbourhood of H. in the township of H. with water. They were empowered to divert the water from springs in a township, L., adjoining H.; and, by way of compensation to certain mill owners in L. who had previously used the said springs, they were required to construct one reservoir in L., and to impound therein sufficient water for the use of such mill owners. Water was to be supplied to the premises of such inhabitants of the town and neighbourhood of H. as might desire it, at certain rents varying with the rack rents of the premises. The Commissioners were authorized to borrow money on the security of their works and water-rents. All the money raised by them was to be applied to the purposes of their acts; and, as soon as all mortgage debts should have been paid off, the water-rents were to be reduced, so that the proceeds should only cover the current expenses of executing the powers of their acts. Under these powers the Commissioners borrowed money, and constructed two reservoirs, one for the supply of water to H., and the other as a compensation reservoir to the mill owners in L., and laid down pipes for conveying water to the inhabitants of H., and received the prescribed water-rents, which had been always applied to the purposes of their

[blocks in formation]

nish water gratis in case of fire; and for watering the streets, at 1d. per 100 gallons.

Held, that neither of the reservoirs was exempted from poor rate as property occupied solely for public purposes. Regina v. Longwood, Overseers, 116

XXIV. Rateable property: waterworks. Compensation reservoirs considered part of apparatus, 116. Ante, XXIII.

XXV. Parish apprentice.

1. Reference to order for binding. Reference in the allowance, when sufficient.

Where an allowance by justices of the binding of a parish apprentice was written at the foot of the indenture, and was subscribed by the justices before execution of the indenture by the parties to the binding: Held that such allowance formed part of the indenture; and that therefore a reference in such allowance to the order for binding was a reference thereto in the indenture, satisfying the requirements of stat. 56 G. 3, c. 139, s. 1. Regina v. Aldborough,

190

2. Who are parties to the binding. The allowing justices, 190. Ante, 1.

XXVI. Chargeability.

Of neglected lunatic, 873. Ante, X. 4. XXVII. Removability: five years' residence. 1. Effect of erroneous refusal to make an order, 318. Post, XXVIII.

2. Order of removal need not negative, 642. Ante, V. 1.

XXVIII. Application for order of removal: hearing.

What refusal cannot be reviewed though founded on a mistake in law.

Mandamus commanding justices of the peace to hear and adjudicate on a complaint by overseers that a pauper was chargeable to and ought to be removed from their township.

The return showed that the defendants had received and begun to hear the complaint: and that, in the course of the investigation, it appeared that the pauper was chargeable to the township, had resided continuously in the township for ten years before the application, and, during six of these ten years (before the passing of stat. 9 & 10 Vict. c. 66), had received parochial relief: and the justices thereupon decided that the pauper was irremovable.

Held, on demurrer, that the return was a sufficient answer, as it showed that defendants had not declined to exercise their jurisdiction, but had exercised it, though erroneously Regina v. Blanshard, 318

XXIX. Order of removal: form.

1. What it need not negative, 642. Ante, V. 1

« EelmineJätka »