« EdellinenJatka »
seems also good reason for requiring that to be done, as the inhabitants of a parish are a fluctuating body, and it would be unjust that one set of persons, at a great distance of time, should be called upon to discharge burdens which were incurred before they became inhabitants. An order of sessions, therefore, quashing the order of reimbursement, and the conviction founded thereupon, was confirmed. (1)
In the foregoing case, the defendant, who was an over- An appeal lies seer of the parish on whom the order of reimbursement against an or
der to reimwas made, had been convicted in a penalty of 51. under burse, under 34 Geo.III. c.47. s.3., and afterwards appealed to the next 34 Geo.III, sessions against the order and conviction. One of the questions made by the sessions was, Whether an appeal could be maintained by the appellants against the order of reimbursement, notice being given thereof subsequent to the conviction? The court, by affirming their order made upon the appeal, decided that the appeal was properly brought. (2)
It seems, likewise, that the parish to which the principal The parish of militia-man belongs, is liable to reimburse that of the sub- the principal
is bound to stitute the expence of maintaining his family, although the reimburse that substitute had more than one child when enrolled (3), or
of the substi
tute, although had neither been approved nor enrolled, provided he is he has more sworn in and actually serves. (4)
than one child
when enrolled. “ One Spry, of the parish of Barnstaple, who was drawn by ballot to serve in the militia, procured one Eastman, of Monkleigh parish, to serve for him as his substitute; when Eastman appeared before the deputy-lieutenant, in order to be approved, he represented himself as a single man; it turned out in the sequel that he was married, and had several children. Eastman being approved and sworn in, went out into actual service; certain expences were in
(1) Rex v. Ledbury, 7 Term Rep. 558.
curred in maintaining his family (1); and the question is, Whether that burden ought to be borne by Monkleigh, that has nothing to do with the principal militia-man, or by the parish of Barnstaple, for which the substitute served ? It seems
to me, that the construction put on the first statute 26 Geo.III. by the prosecutor's counsel; namely, that the words commented upon are merely directory, is the true
The deputy-lieutenants ought to make every inquiry before they approve of a substitute; if he have more than one child, he ought to be rejected; but if the deputy-lieutenants do take him, then he becomes a legal substitute, and the parish for which the principal serves must bear the expence of maintaining his family. The tendency of the defendant's argument is, to show that the whole is a nullity; but the consequence of that must be, that a whole regiment must be disbanded, even in the face of an enemy, if it should be discovered that it is composed of substitutes, each person having more than one child. Besides, the words of the second act of parliament (2) are general; and one of the clauses mentions the word family. As therefore the substitute was approved and sworn in, and actually did serve in the militia, I think that the whole of the acts of parliament attached on him in that situation, and, consequently, that the parish of Barnstaple, for which the principal was drawn, are liable to reimburse the other parish the expences of maintaining the family of the substitute; 8 contrary determination would not only be against the intention of the legislature, but productive of the most dangerous consequences to the whole body of the militia." (3)
And it seems And in Rex v. Ledbury, Lord Kenyon observes, “ If liable where the substitute
the objection had only been that the substitute was not is sworn and approved or enrolled, probably I should have thought though neither (though it is not necessary to decide that point) that upon approved nor the principle of our determination, in Rex v. Willis, that enrolled.
provision in the statute was only directory, and that if the
(1) The facts were found by a special verdict.
substitute were sworn and actually served, he was entitled to all the benefits of the act.” (1)
Of maintaining casual Poor. (2) WHERE a poor person, not settled in a parish, becomes Parish bound chargeable, from accident, sudden calamity, or any other
to maintain circumstance, he falls within the description of casual poor, while residing
there. And to and the parish in which he is detained becomes bound to
reimburse a relieve and take care of him. (3) This obligation is so parishioner asstrong, that if a parishioner, not being a parish officer, sisting them. takes care of one rendered poor and impotent from sudden accident, as by the fracture of a limb, he may recover against the parish officers the sum expended for his cure and support, upon an implied promise arising from this their duty. (4) But the parish cannot recover, as upon an And cannot implied promise, the sum which they have expended for recover what his relief from the place in which he is settled (5), although from his place they give notice to the officers of the parish where the of settlement. pauper is settled pending his illness. (6)
Neither have they a remedy against the master of a ser- Nor from the vant who becomes suddenly disabled by misfortune; for pauper's mas
ter, although parishes are under a moral as well as a legal obligation his yearly to take care of their casual poor. (7)
(1) Rex v. Ledbury, ante, 435. (3). See 51 Geo. III. c. 106. and 52 Geo. III. c. 120. for enabling the wives, widows, and families of soldiers embarked for foreign service, or dying, or employed there, to return to their homes. In the Appendix.
(2) As to the general classes of casual poor, see ante, chap. xxviii.
(7) Newby v. Wiltshire, Cald. 527. Espin. Ni. Pri. Cas. 759., and see Wennell v. Adney, 3 Bos. & Pull. 247., and ante, 156. (3). And quære, whether they can legally, in such a case, obtain an order of removal and suspend it, as was done in Rex v. Kynaston, i East, 107. ante, 374.(1).
Of Overseers' Accounts.
Of the Statutes.
Duty of offi- When the parish officers are retiring from office, their cers retiring
remaining duty is to make up and pass their accounts, and to deliver over any balance in their hands to their suecessors, together with the property and documents of the parish.
43 Eliz.c.2.8.2. By 43 Eliz. c. 2. s. 2. The churchwardens and overseers, Officers must account to
or such of them as shall not be prevented by sickness or their succes- other just excuse, to be allowed by two justices, shall, sors within four days, &c. within four days after the end of their year, and after other
overseers are nominated, make and yield up, to such two justices of peace, true and perfect accounts of all monies received by them, and such sums as have been rated and not received, and of the stock in their hands, or in those of any of the poor to work, and of all other things concerning their office; and such sums as are in their hands, shall pey to the officers newly nominated, upon pain that every one of them neglecting, shall forfeit for every such negligence 205
Sect. 4. Jus- By s. 4. their successors may levy, by warrant from tices may levy two justices, the sum of money or stock which shall be and commit to behind on account; and in defect of distress, the justices gaol, in defect
may commit to the county gaol until payment. They may of distress.
also commit such as refuse to account, there to remain without bail or mainprise, until they have accounted and satisfied, and paid so much as upon the account shall be remaining in their hands.
17 Geo.Il. requires account, &e, within
The 17 Geo. II. c.38. s.l. requires that they shall, within fourteen days after their successors are appointed, deliver in to them just and perfect accounts in writing, fairly en- fourteen days
to be delivered tered in a book to be kept for the purpose, and signed by to their sucthem, of all sums of money received by them, and sums cessors. rated and assessed and not received, and of all goods, chattels, stocks, and materials in their hands, or in those of any of the poor in order to be wrought, and of all monies paid by them, and of all other things concerning their office. They are also to pay and deliver over all sums of money, goods, chattels, and other things, as shall be in their hands, unto the succeeding overseers; and they shall verify their account by oath, or, if a quaker, by affirmation, before oné or more justices, who shall sign and attest the caption of the same at the foot of the account.
It further provides, that the accounts shall be carefully Accounts to be preserved by the parish officers in some public place, that preserved, and persons assessed or liable to be assessed may inspect them, granted. on paying 6d. for such inspection, and may have copies on paying 6d. for every three hundred words.
Sect. 2. enacts, that if they shall refuse or neglect to Sect. 2. Ofi
cers refusing make and yield up an account verified as aforesaid, within
to account,&c: the time limited, or to pay or deliver over such sum or to be commit
ted. sums of money, goods, chattels, and other things in their hands, two or more justices may commit them to the common gaol until they do.
Sect. 3. requires an overseer, removing from the placé Sect. 3. OMfor which he was appointed, to deliver up his accounts, into another
cers removing and pay his balances to some churchwarden or overseer, parish during
their previous to his removal, under like penalties. It also
year. requires, where an overseer dies, that his executor or administrator shall, within forty days, make up the accounts and deliver over any balance in preference to any other debts.
50 Geo. III. c. 49., after reciting the provisions of 43 Eliz. 50 Geo. Ili. c. 2., and also that in 17 Geo. II. c. 38. requiring churchwardens and overseers to deliver up their accounts, veri