verse the fact of the existence of an order—he traverses relief, and denies the chargeability and inhabitancy; and if he had intended to traverse the order, he would have denied it by a specific ground of appeal.

Orders confirmed.

1849.

The QUEEN

V.

Inhabitants of
ST. MARY,
BUNGAY.

The QUEEN V. THOMAS HOLBORÓW.

Nov. 28.

ON appeal against an order of affiliation, under the The notice of

hands and seals of two of her Majesty's justices of the peace for the county of Wilts, dated October 16, 1848, whereby Thomas Holborow was adjudged to be the putative father of a bastard child, of which Lucy Witchell had then been lately delivered, when the appeal was called on, the counsel for the appellant proposed to prove his notices; when he was met by an objection from the counsel for the respondent, that the notice of recognisance was not sufficient, inasmuch as upon the face of the said notice it did not appear that the recognisance was conditioned as required by 8 Vict. c. 10, s. 3. The court of quarter sessions allowed the objection, refused to allow the appeal, and the order stood confirmed, subject to the opinion of the Court of Queen's Bench. The notices were as follows:

(A).—“ To Lucy Witchell.

As the attorney for and on behalf of Thomas Holborow, of Sopsworth, in the county of Wilts, farmer, I hereby give you notice that the said Thomas Holborow did, on the 16th day of October instant, enter into a recognisance before a justice of the peace acting in and for the county of Wilts, such justice of the peace being one of the two justices of the peace making the order

under stat.

recognisance

8 Vict. c.

10, s. 3, (Bastardy Act), the conditions

need not state

of the recognisance.

If the pro

per recog

nisance is not

entered into,

the sessions have no power

to confirm the

order.

1849.

The QUEEN

V.

HOLBOROW.

hereinafter mentioned, to try his appeal at the general quarter sessions of the peace for the county of Wilts, to be holden at Devizes in the said county, after the period of fourteen days next after the making of the said order, against an order of affiliation made on the said 16th day of October instant, whereby he was adjudged to be the putative father of a bastard child, of which you had then been lately delivered.-Dated this 19th of October, 1848."

(B). "To Lucy Witchell.

"Take notice, that I, the undersigned Thomas Holborow, did on the 16th day of October instant, enter into a recognisance, before George Heneage Walker Heneage, Esquire, and the Rev. John Guthrie, or one of them, being the justices or a justice of the peace acting in and for the county of Wilts, to try my appeal at the general quarter sessions of the peace for the county of Wilts, to be holden at Devizes in the said county, after the period of fourteen days next after the making of the order herein mentioned, against an order of affiliation made on the said 16th day of October instant, whereby I was adjudged to be the putative father of a bastard child, of which you had then been lately delivered.-Dated this 19th October, 1848."

The question for the opinion of the Court is, are these notices sufficient, without a further statement of the condition of the recognisance? If the Court should be of opinion that these notices are not sufficient, then the order of sessions and the order of the justices are to be confirmed. If the Court should be of the contrary opinion, then the said appeal to be sent back to the court of quarter sessions to be heard.

Hodges, in support of the order of sessions.-By stat.

1849.

V.

HOLBOROW.

7 & 8 Vict. c. 101, s. 4, the putative father was entitled to appeal, upon giving notice of appeal to the woman, The QUEEN and entering into a certain recognisance; and if the father did not enter the appeal at the sessions, the woman could not get the costs, though she had attended there in consequence of the notice; but by stat. 8 Vict. c 10, s. 3, he must enter into a recognisance with certain conditions, and must forthwith give notice in writing to the woman of his having entered into such recognisance; and it is submitted, that, in the notice to the woman, the recognisance ought to be set out, that she may see whether it contains the proper conditions.

Slade, contrà.-The statute only directs the man to give notice in writing to the woman of his having so entered into such recognisance, but nothing is said of the condition. In the schedule No. 9, giving the form of recognisance, there is no provision for binding the man at all. The intention of the Act was only that the man should inform the woman that he has taken all the steps necessary to enable him to try his appeal; here it might have been proved that the recognisance contained the condition required by the Act.-[Stopped by the Court.]

PATTESON, J.-I think that this notice was sufficient, and that the sessions had no right to confirm the order. In the way this case is drawn up, the result of our decision is, that it is to be sent back to the sessions. We have often refused to hear cases, where the question submitted to us is such that the result of our decision is not final. This is not to be taken as a precedent.

ERLE, J.-I think that the notice to the mother was sufficient to satisfy the statute. The recognisance which

VOL. III.

EEE

N. S. C.

1849.

The QUEEN

v.

HOLBOROW.

would be returned to the sessions would shew if the appellant had a locus standi in court; if he had not, they had no right to confirm the order and make him pay the costs.

Order of sessions quashed, and case sent back to the sessions (a).

(a) Coleridge, J., had left the Court.

INDEX

TO THE

PRINCIPAL MATTERS.