Sivut kuvina
PDF
ePub

CHAP. XXX.

Of relieving and ordering the Poor, and first of Maintenance

THERE

by Relations.

SECT. I.

Division of the Subject.

HERE are certain methods of providing for the poor in ease of the parochial funds, to which the parish officers ought to have recourse in the first instance. 1st, By making particular relations of the impotent poor contribute to maintain them, if they are of sufficient ability to do so. 2d, By enforcing the maintenance of illegitimate children by their reputed parents. 3d, By putting out apprentices. Where these means are incompetent to the poor's relief, they must apply, 4th, to the general fund raised by the rate. (1)

The statute which regulates the support of poor relations is 33 Eliz. c.2. s. 7. 11. and 59 Geo. III. c. 12. s. 26.

The 11 & 12 W. III. c. 4. s. 7., where popish parents refuse to allow their protestant children a maintenance suited to their degree, in order to compel them to change their religion, impowers the lord chancellor, or keeper of the great seal, to make an order therein; and 1 Ann. st.1. c. 30, gives the same power, where protestant children of Jewish parents are in the like situation.

(1) For the further maintenance of the poor, there are many fines and forfeitures payable to their use, as for swearing, drunkenness, destroying the game, and in many other instances which are to be found in Burn's Justice under their proper titles.

And also parts of wastes, woods, and pastures, may be enclosed for the growth and preservation of timber and underwood for their relief, as is set forth in the same book, title Wood. See Burn's Just. Poor Rate, sect. 4. p. 3.

59 Geo. III.

c. 12. s. 36.

In petty sessions.

Must be made by sessions where party domiciled.

But the law compelling the maintenance of relations, as it is to be administered by justices of the peace, depends entirely upon the statute of Elizabeth. (1) The subject divides itself as follows: 1st, By whom this relief is to be ordered. 2d, By whom, and in what cases, it is to be given. 3d, Of the order by which they are to be required to relieve, and the means of inforcing it.

SECT. II.

Of the Justices' Jurisdiction to order Relief.

THE 43 Eliz. c. 2. enacts that the father, grandfather, mother, and grandmother, and children of impotent poor, being of sufficient ability, shall relieve and maintain them, according to that rate, as "by the justices of the county where such sufficient person dwells, at their general quarter sessions, shall be assessed."

But the power of making these orders, which by 43 Eliz. was confined to justices in their quarter sessions, is now extended to justices in their petty sessions by 59 Geo. III. c. 12. s. 36. It enacts, that any two or more justices of the county or other jurisdiction, in which any such sufficient person shall dwell, and they are thereby empowered in any petty session to make such assessment and order for the relief of every poor, old, blind, lame, impotent, or other poor person not able to work, upon and by the father, grandfather, mother, grandmother, or child (being of sufficient ability), of every such poor person as may by virtue of the said act be made by the justices in their general quarter sessions. Every such assessment and order to have the like effect, as if made in quarter sessions, and any disobedience thereof to be punishable in like manner.

This species of relief continues in all other respects to be regulated by 43 Eliz., which ordains this relief only

(1) Vide Rex v. Jacob Mendez de Breta, 1 Ld. Raym. 699.

for persons who, from impotence or infirmity, are unable to work, and by no means requires that those who are able to obtain a livelihood by labour, but unwilling to do so, shall be supported by their relations. (1) It directs the assessment to be made by the general quarter sessions (2) of the county in which the person inhabits, upon whom it is to be made. If made at any other general sessions it is bad. (3) It is the party's residence within their county which give the magistrates jurisdiction to proceed against him; and if he come there for a temporary purpose, they have no power to make an order.

The defendant was brought to the bar upon a habeas corpus. It appeared, by the return, that he was committed by virtue of a warrant from a justice of the peace for the county of Middlesex, because he being the reputed grandfather of one B. G., a poor fatherless and motherless child, maintained at the charge of the parish of St. Giles in the Fields, and being also a man of ability, had refused to maintain or provide for the child, or find sureties for his appearance at the next sessions for the county of Mid

dlesex. It was moved to discharge him, because he lived in Suffolk, and came to London, not to reside, but to follow some law-suits, and therefore, the quarter sessions of Middlesex had no power to make an order, the party inhabiting in Suffolk. The Court. It is very reasonable that he, being of sufficient ability, should contribute to support his grandchild, but he is not compellable to do it by the course which has been taken. The child resides in the parish of St. Giles, in the county of Middlesex, and therefore the contribution must be here, but the party who is to pay it resides in Suffolk. The justices of Suffolk may Justices of one make an order in this case, and thereby cause the money order the mocounty may to be sent from thence to the parish of St. Giles; but the ney to be sent to another.

(1) See Rex v. Litton, post, 264. (4). Rex v. Gulley, ib. (5). (2) Rex v. Charnock, an indictment for disobeying an order made at a general sessions, quashed. Comb. 418. Purnall's case, Salk. 476. Rex v. Turner, 5 Mod. 329.

(3) Ibid. See 59 Geo. III. c. 12. s. 26. ante, 260.

[blocks in formation]

justices of Middlesex have no authority in this case. The court therefore ordered the defendant to be bound over to appear at the next quarter sessions to be held for the county of Middlesex (1); and upon his entering into recognizance for that purpose, he was discharged. (2)

The authority of the sessions is original (3), and cannot be delegated to other justices, but they must themselves set the rate (4); and they cannot send poor persons from their own parish to their relation who should maintain them, but ought to make a rate or order of so much a week upon the relation. (5) And it seems that they may direct the money to be sent to him into another county. (6)

SECT. III.

What Relations may be charged.

It has been ultimately decided, although the point was originally determined otherwise (7), that the 43 of Elizabeth extends only to natural relations, and not to such as are acquired by marriage. (8)

A father-in-law, therefore, is under no obligation to maintain his wife's child after the mother's death (9), nor

(1) Sic. in orig.

(2) Rex v. Reeve, 2 Bulst. 344.

(3) Rex v. Kempson, 1 Bott, 369. Pl. 419. This order was stated to be made on the appeal of the churchwardens, &c., and objected to, because the sessions' jurisdiction is original, and it cannot come before them on appeal. But held well enough, for it is not an appeal from an order, and means only upon application.

(4) Rex v. Humphries Style, 154.

(5) Shermanbury v. Bolney, Comb. 379. Rex v. Jones, Fol. 53.
(6) Rex v. Reeve, ante, (2).

(7) Draper v. Glenfield, 2 Bulst. 345. Custodes v. Julies, Style, 283. City of Westminster v. Gerrard, 346, 347. Reg. v. St. Botolph's, Aldgate, Fol. 42.

(8) Rex v. Munden, 1 Str. 190. Tubb v. Harrison, 4 Term Rep. 118. Cooper v. Martin, 4 East, 76.

(9) Reg. v. Clentham, Fol. 39.

in her life-time (1), although the husband acquire an estate with her (2), nor a father his son's wife or widow (3) neither is a son-in-law, bound to maintain his wife's mother. (4)

But it may be made on a grandfather of ability though the father is living, if he be unable. (5)

And the obligation extends only to such relations as are particularly enumerated in the statute. (6) An order, therefore, cannot be made upon a man to maintain his wife (7), much less a bastard child. (8)

SECT. IV.

Form of the Order of Maintenance, and Punishment for disobeying it.

THE order must state, 1st, That the person upon whom it is made lives within the jurisdiction of the justices who

(1) Rex v. Munday, Fort. 303. Tubb v. Harrison, ante, 262. (8) (2) Cooper v. Martin, 4 East, 76. Woodford v. Lilburn, 1 Bott, 379. Pl. 444.

(3) Rex v. Kempson, 1 Bott, 378. Pl. 443. 2 Str. 955. 2 Barnard, 329. 364. Rex v. Benoire, ib. 377. Pl. 442. Reg. v. Dunn, ib. 376. Pl. 479. and see Rex v. Tripping, 16 Vin. Abr. 424.

(4) Rex v. Munday, Fort. 303. Although his wife is joined in the order, and he had considerable effects with her for the son-in-law is not within the act, and the wife cannot be of ability, because her estate is a gift to the husband, and he is a purchaser, for a valuable consideration.

(5) Reg. v. Joyce, 16 Vin. Abr. 423.

(6) Yet quære, whether grandchildren are not compellable by this act to maintain their grandfather or grandmother? The statute requires the grandfather and grandmother to relieve, but omits grandchild, unless it is comprehended under the word "children." But see Walton v. Sparks, Cas. of Sett. 210.

(7) Reg. v. Davison, 11 Mod. 268. But see Lord Hardwicke's opinion, Rex v. Kempson, ante, (3).

(8) Budwath v. Dumply, Salk. 123. Per Croke and Whitlock Js., City of Westminster v. Gerrard, 2 Bulst. 346.

« EdellinenJatka »