But it is now more usual to obtain the decision of the superior court, by stating a special case. This is commonly settled and signed by the junior counsel on each side. If any difference arises between them upon the statement of facts, reference is had to the chairman's notes to ascertain them. But a fact may be so important or doubtful, as to require that it shall be specifically found by the bench, as other justices may differ from the chairman with respect to it. If the counsel cannot agree upon a case, the chairman may, with the concurrence of the majority of justices, state and sign one himself. There is no certain form of submitting a case by the sessions to the judgment of the court of king's bench. (1) The justices of sessions are judges of the fact, and the court of king's bench are judges of the law upon the facts, An appeal against this order came on to be tried at the Easter sessions for the said county, when the court was of opinion, that the paupers were settled in Michaelstone Vedoes, and quashed the order of removal. A case was then applied for, but not granted, and an unconditional order for quashing the order of removal was entered and remained in the records of the sessions. At the following Midsummer sessions the respondents again moved, that a case should be stated for the opinion of the court of King's Bench in this appeal, on the ground that the sessions were mistaken in point of law, in holding the settlement of the paupers to be in Michaelstone Vedoes. The sessions now made an order, that such a case should be stated and signed by the chairman; and a certiorari was lodged at the Michaelmas sessions to remove these several orders. Campbell obtained a rule to shew cause, why this certiorari should not be quashed, quia improvide emanavit; against which Money shewed cause, contending, that the sessions might, at any time, state a case for the opinion of the court of King's Bench. But Lord Ellenborough and Le Blanc, Bayley and Dampier, Justices, were clearly of opinion, that the magistrates had exceeded their jurisdiction at the Midsummer sessions, and had then no power to grant a case, or in any respect to controul or qualify the absolute order made at the Easter sessions for quashing the order of removal. Rule absolute. Rex v. Michaelstone Vedoes, Mich. 54 Geo. III. Ex Relatione Mr. Campbell. (1) Per Lord Hardwicke C.J., Rex v. Tedford, ante, 558. (3). Manner of stating a special case. No particular form of stating a case. Must state facts and not evidence. Instances of facts which must be stated. though not of the facts themselves. (1) A case, therefore, must state facts and not evidence. But this is meant, that they must draw their own conclusion upon what is asserted by the witnesses, and state that conclusion as the fact, instead of the evidence upon which it is founded; otherwise the court, where it is material to the question before them, will send the case down to be better stated. (2) Thus the place of a birth is a fact which must be found, where a settlement may turn upon it. (3) As also, whether there has been a hiring for a year, if that be material to the pauper's settlement. (4) So, in a question upon the validity of a settlement by indentures of apprenticeship, if it be not stated that the indentures are not stamped with a 6d. stamp, that fact cannot come before the court, for they cannot take notice of any thing but what is strictly before them by the order. (5) So, whether a master give a particular consent to his apprentice to serve a third person, is a fact which the justices should find, and not state evidence of it. (6) They must also state in what parish or township the place of the pauper's residence is situate. (7) Likewise, upon a question of settlement by estate, the sessions ought to find whether it is a gift or a purchase. (8) And in one respecting a settlement by being (1) Per Lord Hardwicke C.J., Rex v. Tedford, ante, 558. (3). (3) Ib. (4) Rex v. Bray, Burr. S. C. 682. (5) Rex v. St. Peter's, Chester, 1 Bott, 544. Pl. 745.; ante, Vol. I. 521. (3). (6) Per Lord Kenyon C.J., Rex v. Shebbear, 1 East, 75.; ante, Vol. I. 567. (3). (7) Rex v. Friendsbury, Burr. S. C. 644. (8) Per Buller J., Rex v. Warblington, 1 Term Rep. 241. 2 Bott, 495. Pl. 512.; ante, 109. (1). rated, they should set forth as a fact, whether the landlord or tenant is rated. (1) fact. Fraud is a fact which the sessions must expressly find; Fraud must be it is not enough to state such evidence as would be sufficient found as a to induce the superior court to conclude that it did exist in the case. Thus, it must be specifically found that the renting a tenement at 10l. per annum was fraudulent (2); or, that a pauper was fraudulently ejected from premises, in order to prevent his gaining a settlement by residing there forty days (3); or that a certificate was fraudulently granted (4); for the court of king's bench will not infer it, however strong the circumstances which are stated may be to warrant such a conclusion. Likewise, in examining these questions, "the justices are only to consider concerning frauds which regard the parish (in order to gain a settlement in it). They are not to inquire concerning fraud between the parties; that would make them a court of chancery." (5) Fraud cogniz- far as respects If the sessions find the fact of fraud generally, the court B. R. how far are bound by the finding. (6) (1) Rex v. Rainham, 5 Term Rep. 240. 2 Bott, 741. Pl. 830. It is not meant by this, and the foregoing instances, that these circumstances must be stated in every case of settlement of that particular kind in which they may occur; but, that when they have a necessary relation to the point in difference, the justices should state them as facts, instead of leaving it to the court of K. B. to infer them as conclusions from what is set forth. For the sessions cannot submit a question to the judges upon the weight of evidence. See Rex v. Llanwinio, 4 Term Rep. 371. post, 562. (1). (2) Rex v. Weston, 2 Str. 1156. ante, 49. (3). S.C. by the name of Rex v. Kirton; and see the opinion of Buller J., Rex v. Fillongley, Term Rep. 458. ante, 5. (1). Rex v. St. Margaret's in Lincoln, Burr. S. C. 728. (3) Rex v. Llanbedergoch, 7 Term Rep. 105. ante, 62. (1). (4) Rex v. Tamworth, Burr. S. C. 770. (5) Per Lord Hardwicke C.J., Rex v. Tedford, ante, 558. (3). (6) Per Lord Hardwicke C.J., Rex v. Tedford, supra (5). Per Buller J., Rex v. Fillongley, supra, (2). bound by a B. R. may determine against their conclusion of fraud, if the facts are stated. B. R. concluded if sessions find a fact. Thus, where the sessions, in a case stated for the opinion of the court of king's bench, found the taking of a tene ment in H. to be fraudulent, and that it did not amount in the whole to 107. a year, but referred the question whether the pauper gained a settlement in H. notwithstanding the fraud; the parish of L. (in which he was previously settled) not being privy to the fraud, and there being contradictory evidence as to the value. The court thought, that the conclusion drawn by the justices was decisive; for they expressly state, "that it was a fraudulent taking, and that it did not amount in the whole to 10l. a-year." (1) But where the sessions stated in a case the facts under which a purchase of a tenement was made for 391., and concluded their case thus: "This court doth declare and adjudge, that the purchase made by Gill (i.e. that before stated) was fraudulent, and that the settlement of Gill, &c. was at Tedford (the parish in which he was settled previous to the purchase), but the parishioners of T. are no ways concerned in the said fraud." Per Lord Hardwicke, C. J. "The justices are judges of the fact, and they may judge of the fraud arising from the fact; but we judge of the law upon the fact, though not of the facts themselves. If they had generally found the fraud, we might have been bound by such a general finding: but when they state the facts particularly, the matter is as much open for our determination upon it as it is for theirs." as it is for theirs." The court afterwards quashed the order, being of opinion that the purchase was not fraudulent. (2) In a case stated upon a rate, the court held themselves concluded, by its being found as a fact by the sessions, (1) Rex v. Llanwinio, 4 Term Rep. 373. 2 Bott, 741. Pl. 829. See also Rex v. St. Nicholas in Harwich, Burr. S. C. 171. (2) Rex v. Tedford, ante, 561. (1). In this case, the court did not presume fraud, but determined that the sessions were not warranted by the facts of the case, in drawing the conclusion, that the purchase was fraudulent. See also the opinion of the judges, Rex v. St. Nicholas in Harwich, Burr. S. C. 171. that the appellant was occupier of the property in question. (1) In a case sent up for the court's determination, whether the landlord or his tenant was the person rated, the sessions set forth all the facts; and also stated, that, in their opinion, the landlord was intended to be rated. The court of king's bench were of opinion that this was a fact, which ought always to be found by the justices (2), and being so found in this case, held itself thereby concluded from entering into the question. (3) That court decided likewise that it was concluded upon the question, whether the governor of a workhouse was a public annual office, by the sessions having found it to be so. (4) Case shall be presurned in general to be "In general, where a case is specially stated, that case is taken to contain the full reason of the determination made by the sessions; and, therefore, if the court hold a full statethose reasons to be ill, they will quash the order of ment. sessions." (5) The justices should, therefore, not only state all the facts Must state the which they consider necessary to enable the court of king's actual case. bench to form an opinion upon the point of law, respecting which they want information (6), but they should likewise set forth all those which are material and were proved before them, that it may be a true state of the case. (7) For the inferior court cannot apply to the superior for its advice upon speculative points of law, but should confine them (1) Rex v. Hurdis, 3 Term Rep. 497. ante, Vol. I. 199. (5). (2) See Rex v. Rainham, 5 Term Rep. 240. (3) Rex v. Folkstone, 3 Term Rep. 505. (4) Rex v. Ilminster, ante, Vol. I. 620. (2). (5) Per Lee and Page Js., Rex v. Tedford, ante, 558. (3). (6) See Rex v. Dursley, 6 Term Rep. 55. 1 Bott, 289. Pl. 280. (7) See the opinion of Lord Hardwicke C. J., Rex v. Tedford, supra (5). |
