Premises need March following. He gained a settlement by residence in the parish during that time, in a cottage which he rented. For the contract by which he bound himself to sell was executory, and the conveyance was not executed until long after the forty days were expired, till when, the title remained in the pauper. (1) And if the estate is vested, the premises need not be in not be in actual the owner's actual occupation. occupation. Infant residing As where an infant of the age of six years and a half in parish where became seised in fee of a freehold estate, and resided in the parish with his grandmother, it was held that he could not be removed. (2) his estate is. duct alter ations in the premises, gives him a settlement. Residence by A pauper was entitled to three copyhold and a freehold a landlord with house, as heir at law to his cousin. He agreed to let the his tenant, as a lodger, to con- freehold house, which was in Sedgefield parish, to W. at 31. per annum, the pauper undertaking to sink a cellar, and make some repairs. W. accordingly entered and occupied the premises as a public-house, and the pauper after such possession by W. went to S. for the sole purpose of sinking the cellar, and making the repairs agreed upon, during the whole of which time he resided as a lodger in W.'s house. He was held to gain a settlement upon the principle that residence in the parish in which the party has a freehold estate confers a settlement, whether he resides on the estate or not, or whether or not he is in the occupation thereof. For a man, though not in the occupation of his own estate, may have many reasons for wishing to live in the neighbourhood of it, and is entitled to the privilege of superintending it." (3) The law is the same when the landlord has only a leasehold interest in the premises. (1) Rex v. Dorstone, 1 East, 296. See ante, 71. (2) Rex v. Hasfield, Burr. S. C. 147. 2 Str. 1132. Rex v. Houghtonle-spring, 1 East, 247. See also Rex v. Dorstone, ante, (1), Rex v. Staplegrove, 2 B. & A. 527. S. P. (3) Rex v. Houghton-le-spring, 1 East, 247. A pauper being entitled to a leasehold house, as her father's sole next of kin, demised it to a tenant, who paid her rent. She resided elsewhere in the same parish with her family, and was held to have thereby acquired a settlement. (1) gagor and As between a mortgagor and mortgagee, it is the party Possession as who is in possession that gains the settlement, because it is between mortthe possession which decides as between them the right to mortgagee. the occupation or pernancy of the profits. (2) A beneficial terial: trustee interest imma It is likewise immaterial whether the party has a beneficial interest in the estate: a mere trustee may acquire a settlement, for nobody can take the estate from him, and it gains a settleis sufficient that he reside in the parish forty days, and cannot be removed from it. (3) ment. Upon the same principle a guardian in socage ac- Also aguardian quires a settlement, and also a subsequent husband in her in socage. right. (4) The following case has also been decided: The father of pauper's wife let his freehold cottage to the parish officers, and their successors for 1000 years, and they took possession. In 1813, he was placed in it with another pauper by the parish officers, and the pauper's wife came to nurse him: he died there, and his daughter continued in the cottage, where the pauper joined her in about six weeks, and laid claim to the cottage as his wife's property. The parish officers having mislaid their conveyance, could not withstand her claim; and the pauper and her family continued to reside five years, when becoming chargeable, and the conveyance being found, they were re(1) Rex v. Horsley, 8 East, 405. (2) Ante, 85. (3) Per Ashhurst J., Rex v. Stone, 6 Term Rep. 295. ante 79. (3). Per Le Blanc J. Rex v. Oakley,10 East, 491. Rex v. Wilby, 2 M. & S. 504. (4) Rex v. Oakley, 10 East, 491. But a widow must have her dower actually assigned to entitle her to a settlement. See ante, 94. Rex v. North Weald, Bassett, post. A felon convict. Number and connexion of tenants immaterial; moved: but they were held settled, and the order removing them, was quashed. For the pauper was neither within the words, the spirit, or mischief of the provision recited in the preamble of 13 & 14 Car. II. c. 12., "He comes not for any of the motives the statute meant to repress, but because he has a freehold in the parish; not to prey upon the parish stock, but to live upon that of which he is a freeholder, and as to which he was warranted in concluding that he was entitled to the possession. This is not a case of fraud, nor a case in which the pauper is conscious at the time that he is taking the possession wrongfully, nor a case in which the person entitled to possession takes prompt measures to displace him; leaving such cases to be decided when they may arise, it is sufficient for us to say, that there does not appear to have been fraud or consciousness of wrong; and where no measures were taken within the forty days or afterwards, to dispute the pauper's occupation, we are of opinion, that the residence was sufficient." (1) It has been likewise held that an attainted felon, discharged by an order of the secretary of state under the sign manual, which directed his name to be inserted in the next general pardon, having afterwards purchased a copyhold for more than 30l. to which he was admitted upon surrender formally made, and whereon he resided and received the issues and profits for more than nine years without impeachment of his title, thereby acquired a settlement, which he communicated to the unemancipated part of his family. (2) As to the number and connexion of the tenants, it forms no consideration in the question of settlement; they may be tenants in co-parcenary, joint-tenants or tenants in common. A tenant in common, of an estate of inheritance, may acquire a settlement (3); as also one of three co (1) Rex v. Staplegrove, 2 B. & A. 527. (2) Rex v. Haddenham, 15 East, 463.; and see the same at length, post. chap. xxvii. (3) Rex v. St. Nyott's, Burr. S. C. 132. parceners by residence in the parish (1); and as their interest is equal, it seems they may all gain settlements. (2) One of four executors was settled by residence in the parish where the premises were situated, out of which their interest accrued. So also the owner of a leasehold interest acquired a settlement, although the grantor reserved a sleepingplace (3), or although the grantee demised all the premises to another, excepting a fourth part. (4) receives relief Neither does it make any difference, if there is no fraud, or that pauper that the pauper receives relief from another parish, during from another his residence. (5) parish. SECT. II. Of Settlement by Purchase under 9 Geo. I. c. 7. THE 9 Geo. I. c. 7. is confined to cases of estates ac- 9 Geo. I. c. 7. quired by purchase, for which a consideration, amounting to 30%., must be bona fide paid. (6) It does not enable persons to acquire a settlement, but prohibits them from gaining one by an estate purchased under certain circumstances. This statute may be considered under three heads. 1st, To what estates it extends. 2d, How the value or consideration is to be computed. 3d, What amounts to a bona fide payment of the consideration. The purchaser is irremoveable during the time of his inhabiting the purchased premises; but as his settlement is, as it were, only temporary, no derivative one results from it (1) Rex v. Dorstone, 1 East, 296. (2) See Rex v. Dorstone, ante, (1). (3) Rex v. Marwood, ante, 80. (4). Rex v. Uttoxeter, Burr. S. C. 558. (4) Murfley v. Grandborough, ante. 71. (9). (5) Rex v. Ufton, 5 Term Rep. 251. (6) See the words of sect. v. ante, 73. Purchasers under 30l. irre movable. Construction of 9 Geo. I. To what estates 9Geo.I. extends. Nature of estate immaterial. Grant by lord of manor, wards worth 100/.; this a purchase within the act, and confers no settlement. to children, nor is that previously possessed by the parent thereby extinguished. (1) A learned judge has delivered it as his opinion, that under this act, "There must be either an estate or an interest purchased, and by the latter words is to be understood a definite interest, for which the party contracts at the time of making the contract. If the question were res integra, I should be disposed to hold, that the legislature meant a legal interest only. It has been decided, however, that a cestui que trust has a sufficient interest in land to gain a settlement under this statute; and I feel bound to adhere to their decisions." (2) It has been already shewn, that the act extends only to cases where the party acquires an estate or interest in lands or tenements for a pecuniary consideration. (3) The nature and quality of the estate is of no signification. It may be freehold, copyhold, or leasehold. The consideration is usually paid at the time when the interest is acquired; but it may be made in the shape of an annual reservation, the judges seeming inclined to consider such a case within the statute, at least for the purpose of excluding the party from a settlement. W. B. was certificated in the parish of Havant. On 20th October, 1748, J. M., lord of the manor of H., granted by copy of court-roll" to W. B. and his heirs, one parcel of the waste ground, called the Gravel-pit, parcel of the manor, and within the parish of H." then of the value of thirty or forty shillings. W. B., by virtue of the grant, entered on the premises, (which did not appear to have been previously granted by copy of court-roll,) built a house, and mortgaged the premises for 100l. The mortgagee sold the premises in 1763; and on the death of (1) Verba Bayley J., Rex v. Geddington, 2 B. & C. 183. (2) Rex v. Salford, Burr. S. C. 516. 1 Black. Rep. 433, and see (3) Ante, 74. post. |
