situated. The provisions to this effect in local acts have given way to the following general enactment. First, Of settlements in general. All enactments and provisions in respect of gaining settlein local acts repealed. ments contained By 54 Geo. III. c. 170, it is enacted, "That all enactments and provisions contained in any act or acts of parliament since the commencement of the reign of his late Majesty George the First, whereby any alteration is made, in respect of gaining or not gaining a settlement within any particular district, parish, township, or hamlet, shall be, and the same are hereby repealed; and that all and every person shall be deemed and taken to have acquired and to acquire a settlement in every such district, parish, township, or hamlet, by any ways and means, he, she, or they would or might have done, or would or might do, in case such act or acts, or any of them, had not been made and passed; and notwithstanding the same or any of them are or was in force and operation." Sect. 2 provides, "That no person shall be deemed or taken to acquire any settlement in any district, parish, township, or hamlet, by reason of such person prisons, or houses being born of the body of any mother actually confined as a prisoner within reception of pregthe walls of any prison; or any house licensed for the reception of pregnant nant women, not women, in pursuance of an act made and passed in the thirteenth year of his to gain a settle. present Majesty's reign, for the better regulation of lying-in-hospitals, and other places appropriated for the charitable reception of pregnant women; in which any such prison or house shall be situated." Sect. 3 provides, "That whensoever any person shall be born of the body of any poor person, in any house of industry, or house for the reception and care of the poor of any district, parish, township, or hamlet, which shall be locally situated in any district, parish, township, or hamlet contributing to the expences of maintaining the poor in such house, or in any other district, parish, township, or hamlet, not contributing to such expence, such person shall, so far as regards the settlement of such person, be deemed and taken to be born in the district, parish, township, or hamlet, by whom the mother of such person was sent to, and on whose account the mother of such person was received and maintained in such house." Sect. 4 provides and enacts, "That no person shall be deemed or taken to gain any settlement by reason of any residence within any district, parish, township, or hamlet, while he, she, or they shall be detained or confined as a prisoner within any such district, parish, township, or hamlet, on any civil process, or for any contempt whatsoever." Sect. 5 provides and enacts, "That no gate-keeper or toll-keeper of any turnpike-road or navigation, or person renting the tolls and residing in any toll-house of any turnpike-road or navigation, shall thereby gain any settlement in any district, parish, township, or hamlet." (The general turnpike act, 3 Geo. IV. c. 126, s. 51, is to the like effect.) Sect. 6 provides and enacts, "That no person or persons shall gain any settlement in any district, parish, township, or hamlet, by reason of any residence in any house or other dwelling-place provided for the residence of such person or persons, by any charitable institution, while such person or persons shall be supported and maintained at the expence of such charitable institution, as an object or objects of such charity. And by 59 Geo. III. c. 12, s. 11, it is enacted, that every house and building which shall be purchased or hired under the authority of that act, (vide sections 8, 9, 10, 14, 15, 16, 17, and 18, ante, 190, 191,) shall in all questions relative to the settlement of persons born or lodged therein, be deemed and taken to be part of the parish, on behalf of which the same shall be purchased or hired, and by which the same shall be used as a poorhouse or workhouse. A settlement attaches to those persons only, concerning whom those circumstances may be affirmed, which acts of parliament say shall give a settlement. It is not universally true that every person in this country must have a settlement to which he may be removed, for bastard children born in an extra-parochial place which is not a vill, have no settlement, nor foreigners who come into this country. Rex v. St. Nicholas, Leicester, 2 B. & C. 889; 4 D. § R. 462. Such persons are denominated casual poor, and must be provided for in the parish where they happen to be. See Casual Poor. Persons born in licenced for the ment thereby. Provision rements by reason of birth in any poorhouse or house of industry belonging to specting settle united parishes. Prisoners for debt or contempt not to gain settle ments while in custody. No gate-keeper, or person residing in any toll house, to gain a settlement there. by. No person maintained in any charitable insti tution, to gain any settlement by residence therein. Building hired under 59 Geo. 3, in the parish, &c., hiring, in questions of settle c. 12, taken to be ment. Who can acquire a settlement. It is not every person who has a settlement. he Foreigners. Although a foreigner has not necessarily a settlement in this country, may acquire one, in some of the modes by which natural born subjects First, Of settlements in general. A foreigner may by occupying a tenement of 101. for a year. obtain this privilege; thus, the wife of a foreigner was removed to Eastbourne, (the place of her maiden settlement,) from Seaford, where he had for two years before, and at the time of the removal, resided, and rented a house of above the value of 101., exercising the trade of a baker. The gain a settlement husband acquiesced in the removal, and accompanied them to Eastbourne. The sessions confirmed the order of removal, and the question was, whether a foreigner can gain a settlement in this country? St. Giles's v. St. Margaret's was cited, and it was urged that the 13 & 14 Car. II. referred only to the poor of this kingdom, i. e. England and Wales.-Per Lord Ellenborough, C. J. This man was not an alien enemy, but a German by birth, an alien amy. And as such, though he may not take a lease (a) of a dwelling-house or shop, by reason of the statute 32 Hen. VIII. c. 16, yet he may occupy a tenement of 10l. a-year, and carry on his trade there like any other person. Then if he may do so he has that interest which enables him to gain a settlement by the provision of the legislature: the law of humanity obliges us to afford relief to poor foreigners to save them for starving.— Lawrence, J., in answer to the observation, that the statute of Car. II. did not extend to any but the poor of England and Wales, said, that, "without dispute, Scotchmen and Irishmen may gain settlements here." Both orders quashed. Rex v. Eastbourne, 4 E. 103. A foreigner does not gain a settlement by mere residence of 40 days in a parish. Married women. Infants under seven. Attainted per sons. Deserters. St. Giles's v. St. Margaret's, 1 Sess. Ca. 97. An Englishwoman was married to a foreigner who had no settlement in England: the husband continued for the space of forty days in a parish, irremovable, for that there was no place to which he could be removed; and it was urged, that the wife continuing with him as part of his family for forty days, in a place whence he hath not a right to be removed, gains a settlement. But Lord Holt, C. J., thought that where a person stays forty days in a place whence he hath a right not to be removed, that gains a settlement; otherwise, where he only stays in a place because they do not know whither to remove him. Ellinor Conred's Case, Comb. 287; 2 Bott, 17. She and her two children landed at Harwich, from Holland, and removing to another place, were sent back to Harwich by order of two justices.-Darnel, Serj. Landing makes no settlement. Sir Barth. Shower, 'Tis within the equity of the act.-Eyres, J., (absente Holt), You must keep them where you have them for aught I know; it seems to be casus omissus. The order was quashed. Married women, during their coverture, cannot by any act of their own acquire a settlement. What is their proper settlement will be considered in another place. Nor infants under the age of seven years. In Rex v. Hasfield, Burr. S. C, 147, it was decided that an infant under seven could not be removed from the parish in which his freehold lay, though it did not appear either that he was in possession, or in occupation of it. And see Rex v. Houghton le Spring, 1 East, 247, where this case was adverted See also Rex v. Cumner, 2 Bott, 18; and 2 Nol. P. L. 89. As to the doctrine here advanced, see post, tit. Removal. to. Persons attainted may communicate their settlement to children born after the attainder, but Lord Kenyon said, It would be another question whether the man himself could acquire a settlement after the attainder. Rex v. St. Mary, Cardigan, 6 T. R. 116; but this doubt of Lord Kenyon's seems entirely removed by Rex v. Haddenham, 15 East, 463, where an attainted felon, who had been discharged, but never received a formal pardon, acquired a settlement by the purchase of an estate. În former editions of this work it has been said that a deserter can gain no settlement, and Rex v. Norton, 9 East, 206, is cited as an authority. But that case determined only that he could not gain a settlement by hiring and service, on account of the superior claim to his service by the country. But suppose a deserter executed an annual office, or rented a tenement, it seems doubtful whether his desertion from the army would prevent his thereby acquiring a settlement. (a) This section applies only to leases of dwelling house or shops granted to stranger artificers or handicraftsmen. A vintner is not within the statute, 3 In the case of Rex v. Ashton-under-Lyne, 4 M. & S. 357, the wife had taken the premises, and occupied part of them with her family, long before the husband deserted, and the argument proceeded chiefly upon that ground, leaving it to be inferred, that if the husband had himself entered into the contract, and done all the other acts necessary to establish a settlement, the circumstance of his being a deserter at the time would not have defeated it. It has been decided, that a soldier may, during his service in the army, gain a settlement by renting a tenement, although he could not by hiring and service. Rex v. Brightelmstone, B. & A. 270; Rex v. Beaulieu, post, Hiring and Service. It is no objection that his estate was defeasible. See Rex v. Haddenham, 15 East, 460. First, Of settlements in general. Legitimate children take the settlement of their father, or if he has no settlement, they are entitled to the maiden settlement of their mother; and it is only when both these sources fail, that their right accrues to a settlement in the place in which they were born. But until the settlement of the father or of the mother has been ascertained, the settlement of a legitimate child, like that of a bastard, is primâ facie in the parish where the birth took place; and if that cannot be ascertained, then the child is not removable from the place where it was found, and must be relieved there as a casual pauper. A child was removed to the place of its birth, neither father nor mother having a settlement; and on appeal the sessions were of opinion, that birth gains no settlement, but only in case of bastardy.-Per Curiam (absente Holt, C. J.) Birth makes a good settlement, and the labour lies on them where it was born, to find another. The order made on appeal was quashed. Spitalfields and St. Andrews, Holborn, Fort. 307. Cripplegate v. St. Saviour's, 2 Bott, 27; 1 Nol. P. L. 278. A child of three years of age was removed from one of these parishes to the other; and it appeared in the order, that they removed him there, because he was born there, not having any other settlement. By the Court. The father's settlement is the settlement of the children, when it can be found out; otherwise the birth of the child primâ facie is the settlement of the child, until there is another settlement found out. It will be seen hereafter, that if the father has no settlement, but the mother has, the child shall be removed to the mother's settlement, and not to the place of its own birth. See post, title, Settlement by Parentage. The place of birth is primâ facie the place of settlement; Rex v. Heaton and Norris, 6 T. R. 653; even if the pauper is a widow or a married woman. See Rex v. Ryton, post, 315. But per Bayley, J. "I cannot concur in the argument, that the mere fact of a pauper being first found in a particular parish, is presumptive evidence of his having been born there; and if the cases that have been referred to go that length, I, for one, must be allowed to doubt their authority." Rex v. Trowbridge, 1 M. & R. 12; 7 B. & C. 252. And in many cases, proof of the place of birth will afford but slight evidence of settlement, though of course it may be acted upon if no proof tending to fix the settlement elsewhere be offered. See Rex v. Wakefield, 5 East, 335. In Clarely & Burton, 2 Bulst. 351, it was holden by the judges, that Secondly, Of settlement by birth. 1. Of a legitimate child. The place of birth of a legitimate child as a vagrant, is its settlement, until another be found. First known place of abode. Child born in parents without settlement. if the mother of a child born in one parish die in another parish, while passing to a third, such child shall be settled where it was born, and not in the parish where it was left destitute by the death of the mother. Whitechapel v. Stepney, Carth. 433; 2 Bott, 12; 1 Nol. P. L. 285, 288. It was holden that a legitimate child, where its parent is a vagabond, gains a settlement by birth; but where the settlement of the parent of a legitimate child is known, such child must follow the settlement of the parent. A travelling woman, having a nurse child, was apprehended for felony, and sent to gaol, and was hanged; this child is to be sent to the place of its birth, if it can be known, otherwise it must be sent to the town where the mother was apprehended, because that town ought not to have sent the child to gaol, being no malefactor. Dalt. c. 73, p. 168. And where a child is first known to be, that parish must provide for it till they find another. Comb. 364, 372. Rex v. Great Clacton, 3 B. & A. 410. J. W. removed from St. Margaret's England of Irish in Ipswich, to Great Clacton in Essex. Order confirmed, subject to the following case: The pauper's late father, was born in Ireland, and was married in that country in 1807, to A. C., who was also born there. The pauper was born in 1810, in Great Clacton, and the father died in St. Margaret in 1817, without having gained a settlement in England. The mother subsequently married H. F., settled in St. Margaret, where she resided, and the pauper had become chargeable. Before the last marriage she had acquired no settlement in England. Storks contended, that under 59 Geo. III. c. 12, s. 33, the pauper ought to have been removed by a pass to Ireland. But K. B. held that the removal was properly made. Without determining what might have been the case if the mother had also been removable at the time, it is clear here that she having acquired a settlement by marriage, the pauper's case is to be considered as if he had no parent alive. Then, if so, the clause in question only applies to persons who are themselves born in Ireland, which he was not. Order of sessions confirmed. See tit. Vagrants, Vol. V. The unemancipated daughter of Irish parents may be removed to her birth settle ment, if the parents have not become charge The same doctrine was held in the following case, where both parents were Irish, and living, and their grown up daughter, residing with them, had become chargeable : Rex v. The Inh. of Whitehaven, 5 B. & A. 720 ; 1 D. & R. 384. Upon an appeal by the inhabitants of the township of Workington, in the county of Cumberland, against an order of removal of Mary M'Cormick from the township of Whitehaven, in the said county, to the township of Workington ; the sessions quashed the order, subject to the following case: The pauper, Mary M'Cormick, an unmarried woman with child, and thereby chargeable and she has. able, but who had not applied for, or received, parochial relief, was removed from Whitehaven to Workington, as the place of her birth settlement. The pauper, at the time of her removal, was above the age of 21, had gained no settlement for herself, was unemancipated, and living with her father and mother, as part of their family. The father and mother were both Irish, and had gained no settlement in England. The father had not applied for, or received, any relief from the removing township, for himself or any part of his family. The father was not examined by the removing magistrates. The question for the opinion of the Court was whether, under the provisions of the 59 Geo. III. c. 12, and the above circumstances, the pauper was properly removed to the place of her birth settlement. F. Pollock, in support of the order of sessions, contended, that the whole family should have been removed by a pass to Ireland, under 59 Geo. III. c. 12, s. 33. That here the pauper became chargeable, within the meaning of the statute, by his family, for his daughter being an unmarried woman, and pregnant, was, according to the 35 Geo. III. c. 101, s. 6, actually chargeable to the parish where she was residing. By the Court. We are of opinion that the chargeability contemplated by the legislature, in 59 Geo. III. c. 12, s. 33, was the actual asking for parish relief, and not the constructive chargeability created by 35 Geo. III. c. 101, s. 6. The order of sessions is wrong, and must be quashed. Order of sessions quashed. Secondly, Of settlement by birth. 1. Of a legitimate By 13 Geo II. c 29, for confirming and enlarging the powers conferred by charter upon the governors and guardians of the hospital for the maintenance and education of exposed and deserted young children, it is provided by s. 7, that no child, nurse, or servant, received or employed in such hospital shall, by virtue thereof, gain any settlement in the parish where such child. hospital shall be situate. The settlement of foundlings, therefore, is left to be Foundlings determined by the same rule as prevails in all other cases wherein those maintained in particulars as to their birth and parentage can be ascertained, which deter- hospitals. mine the settlement of the child in such other cases. According, however, to the popular notion of a foundling, these facts are not made known, nor are they easy to be discovered. But it is to be inferred that the institution to which the above statute relates, is not limited to the reception of children whose destitution is of that aggravated description. It involves no absurdity, therefore, to say that foundlings, if they are legitimate children, follow their father's settlement, if it is known; if not, they take their mother's; and if neither of these be known, or they are bastards, their settlement will be in the place of their birth. But if that also cannot be discovered, they must be provided for in the place in which they may happen to be, as casual poor. The effect of an admission upon this charitable establishment, is only to take those children from the parish where they must otherwise have been supported, and to give them the benefit of the provisions of the hospital. 54 Geo. III. c. 170, s. 2 & 3, ante, p. 275. 2. Of a Bastard. 1. By Birth of a Bastard in General. See An illegitimate child cannot derive a settlement from either of its parents, 2. Of a bastard. and generally speaking it is settled in the place where it was born. Rex v. St. Nicholas, Leicester, 2 B. & C. 889; 4 D. § R. 462; infra. birth. A settlement by birth seems to be founded on the 13 & 14 Car. II. c. 12; The place of by which justices are directed to remove any poor person come to inhabit, and likely to become chargeable to the parish where he or she was last legally settled, either as a native, householder, &c., for the space of forty days at the least, and therefore it would seem that a residence of forty days is essential to the acquisition of a birth settlement. But there is no decision to this effect, and the tacit convention of parishes not to insist upon it, would most probably induce the Court of K. B. to overrule such an objection if it were now attempted to be set up. See 1 Nol. P. L. 288; n. (1.) Generally speaking, an illegitimate child is settled in the place where it is born. Rex. v. St. Nicholas, Leicester, 2 B. & C. 889; 4 D. & R. 462; infra; and this is so whether the parent be a housekeeper or a lodger merely. Rex. v. Spitalfields, 1 Lord Raym. 567. In Whitechapel v. Stepney, Carthew, 433; it is said that a bastard gains a settlement in its place of birth ex necessitate, for being nullius filius, it cannot otherwise be provided for, except a reputed father can be found. But this proposition is laid down rather too largely, because if the birth happen in an extra-parochial place, which does not maintain its poor, no settlement is gained, and such child can only be relieved as casual poor, till it acquires a settlement in some other way, as appears by : Rex. v. St. Nicholas, Leicester, 2 B. & C. 889; 4 D. & R. 462; 2 D. §. R. Mag. C. 253. Caroline Littlewood was removed from All Saints, in Derby, to Saint Nicholas, in Leicester. Order confirmed. Case: The pauper was the illegitimate child of Elizabeth Littlewood, deceased, and was born in May, 1822, in an extra-parochial place, called the Black Friars, in Leicester, which is not a vill, and for which no overseers have ever been appointed. She was shortly afterwards taken by her mother to All Saints, Derby, where she remained until the death of her mother, and up to the time of this order of removal. The mother had, six years previously to the birth of the pauper, gained a settlement in the parish of Saint Nicholas, and was legally settled in that parish at the time of the birth of the child and of her own death. Clarke was heard in support of the order VOL. IV. T A bastard child, born in an extra parochial place, which is not a vill, has no set tlement. |