this case; and I think that it would be inconvenient that the justices should go on to inquire into the foundation of the jurisdiction under which the pauper lunatic was confined. The opinion of Erle J., in Reg. v. The Guardians of the Carnarvon and Anglesea Union (a), goes to the point before us; and the language of Lord Campbell, in the later case of Reg. v. The Inhabitants of Crediton (b), shews that he was of opinion that the jurisdiction to adjudge the settlement attached on the fact of the pauper lunatic being in the asylum. One of the objections was the same as that made to-day, and he said, "It appears to that none of the objections made are sustainable," and Erle J. adhered to the opinion which he had before expressed, in Reg. v. The Guardians of the Carnarvon and Anglesea Union (a), as to the construction of the previous Act, 8 & 9 Vict. c. 126., viz., that the two main facts which give jurisdiction to make the order of settlement and maintenance are, the pauper lunatic being confined in the asylum and being settled in the parish on which the order is made. me On these grounds I am of opinion that our judgment ought to be for the respondents. Judgment for the respondents. (@) 3 N. S. C. 708, 713-714; and see note (b) to Reg. v. The In habitants of Minster, 14 Q. B. 357. (b) E. B. & E. 231. 241. 1862. FAVERSHAM V. Isle of THANET. 1862. Thursday, Poor law audit. The QUEEN against The Inhabitants of CHID DINGSTONE. In 1854, a pauper lunatic was sent to an asylum at the charge of the parish of C., in which she had acquired the status of irremovability: her maintenance was charged to C., and allowed in the half yearly audits until Michaelmas, 1860, when the overseer of C. objected that they ought to be charged to the common fund of the Union to which C. belonged. The auditor disallowed the costs for the six months ending Michaelmas, 1860, against the parish, and transferred them to the common Union fund account, but refused to reopen the accounts previously audited. On motion to vary the allowance, brought up by certiorari under stat. 7 & 8 Vict. c. 101. s. 35., by crediting the parish of C. with the sums paid in previous years and debiting the common fund of the Union with those sums: held, that the auditor did right in not reopening the accounts previously audited. IN Easter Term, 1861, Barrow obtained a rule, on behalf of the inhabitant ratepayers of the parish of Chiddingstone, in the county of Kent, calling upon G. M. Arnold, Esq., Auditor of the West Kent Audit District, to shew cause why the allowance made by him, on the 7th December, 1860, in the accounts of the Sevenoaks Union for the half year ending Michaelmas Day, 1860, should not be varied by crediting the parish of Chiddingstone with 150%. 18s. 4d., and debiting the common fund of the said Union with the same sum. The auditor's certificate, which had been removed by certiorari under stat. 7 & 8 Vict. c. 101. s. 35., was as follows: "I hereby certify that, in the accounts for the half year ending Michaelmas Day, 1860, contained in the general and parochial ledgers of and belonging to the board of guardians of the Sevenoaks Union, I have disallowed the sum of 11. 17s. 8d., charged therein against the parish of Chiddingstone, for and in respect of the maintenance of Jane Medhurst, a lunatic; and I have transferred the said charge of 117. 17s. 8d. to the debit of the common fund account, entered in the said general ledger, and subject to the said disallowance I have allowed the said account in all other respects. "My reasons for the above disallowance are as follow: that Jane Medhurst, a pauper lunatic, was, in 1854, sent to the Kent County Lunatic Asylum, at the charge of the parish of Chiddingstone, from which parish she was then irremovable from length of residence, her settlement being elsewhere. Her maintenance continued to be charged by the lunatic asylum to the said parish; and the guardians of the Union, who paid the same, also charged such payments in like manner to the said parish in their half yearly accounts from that period up to the present time. The steward of the said asylum refused an application to transfer the charge for the maintenance of the lunatic to the guardians of the Union, in respect of their common fund, without an order of justices, under "The Lunatic Asylums Act, 1853," 16 & 17 Vict. c. 97. "Two justices, on the 28th of April, 1858, made an order, which was prepared for signature (but not actually signed till two years later), ordering the payment of 31., the expenses of the pauper's examination, and 1007. 6s. 8d., the accumulated amount of her maintenance &c. at the asylum, from the 10th March, 1854 (when the lunatic was sent to the asylum), to that date, to be paid out of the common fund; and this order was considered to be authorized by the 102d section of the said Act. The order also similarly provided for the payment of the future maintenance. 1862. The QUEEN V. Inhabitants of STONE. 1862. The QUEEN V. Inhabitants of STONE, "The total amount of maintenance, from the period of the pauper being sent to the asylum up to the end of the Lady Day half year 1860, is 150l. 18s. 4d.; the further cost of maintenance for the half year ending Michaelmas, 1860, included in the accounts now under audit by me, is the said sum of 117. 17s. 8d. "The overseers of the parish of Chiddingstone, as ratepayers of that parish and otherwise, requested me, by their solicitor, to disallow the accumulated charge of 1627. 16s., as entered in the Union ledgers against the said parish, and, in lieu thereof, to charge the whole of such sum against the common fund account. "The clerk to the guardians, while admitting that the parish of Chiddingstone was equitably entitled to relief, contended that sect. 102 of the said Act was controlled by sect. 97, and that the justices could order the payment of the costs of the twelve previous calendar months' maintenance only. "Having heard what was alleged on both sides, I have made the certificate of disallowance and allowance as above, and my reason for so much of the same as relates to the said disallowance is that, under the said order of justices of the 28th April, 1858, the maintenance of the said lunatic for the half year ending Michaelmas, 1860, ought to have been charged by the guardians of the said Union upon the common fund of the said Union, and not against the said parish: and for the said allowance, that I have "no power by law as auditor to reopen the accounts of the several half years previous to the accounts of the half year, to wit, the half year ending Michaelmas, 1860, now under my examination, the said accounts of the said previous half years having been long since by me examined, audited and closed, and my functions of auditor in regard thereto having become terminated and dis charged. Witness my hand, this 7th day of December, 1860." "G. M. Arnold." 1862. The QUEEN V. The parish of Chiddingstone, in the county of Kent, Inhabitants of is comprised in the Sevenoaks Union, which Union is within the West Kent Audit District. F. Russell shewed cause.-First, the duty of the auditor at the time of making the certificate was confined to auditing the accounts for the half year immediately preceding Michaelmas, 1860, and he had no power to examine into the propriety of charges made in the accounts of previous half years. Secondly, if he had a discretion as to opening the accounts of previous half years, he exercised it rightly in refusing to do so; because the parish officers and ratepayers of Chiddingstone had knowledge, or means of knowledge, during the previous half years in which the pauper lunatic was chargeable, that the charge of maintaining her was, under stat. 16 & 17 Vict. c. 97. s. 102., debited to the account of their parish by the guardians⚫ of the Sevenoaks Union, instead of to the common fund of the Union; and it was the duty of the overseers and ratepayers of Chiddingstone to have objected, at the audit of each half year's account, to any improper charge made against them.-The Court then called upon CHIDDING- Barrow, to support the rule.-It was the object of stat. 16 & 17 Vict. c. 97. to make the same regulations with respect to the settlement of pauper lunatics as had previously prevailed with respect to ordinary paupers. Sect. 97 empowers two justices "at any time to inquire into the last legal settlement" of a pauper lunatic in an asylum, |