of Nctice in Writing cf the Houfe of his Abode, and the Number of his fa-
mily, to one of the Church-wardens or Overfeers of the Poor of the Parijb
to which they pall remove.
Cartb. 2S. 2. V.fervcd his Apprenticepip at Maiden, where he married, and had fc-
Pafch. 1 W.
s'c* h a Term for 2 ears in a Houfe in the Pariih of Heybridge, where he lived j or
Name of the'** â– ^ M * > Alter wards he return 'd to Maiden, was rated to the Poor, and
King v. the lived there two Tears, and then died. Soon alter his Wile and Children
Inhabitants were removed to Heybridge by two Jultices, but upon an Appeal they
mu were by an Order of Sefiions declared to be Inhabitants of Maiden. Mr.
and Hey- ' Pollexlen moved to qualh it; becaufe it does not appear, that he gave
bridge inEf- any formal Notice in Writing to the Overfeers of Maiden, when he re-
fex ; but turned from Heybridge, and therelore ought to be fettled there, and not
ftys, that the aC balden ; For being taxed to the Poor will not amount to Notice, and
firmed the ne cited a ltronger Cale, which was thus, viz.. The Church-wardens of
Order ; For Covent Garden certified under their Hands, That fuch a Perfon was an hi-
that the Pa- habitant within their Parijh, but becaufe no Note was left with them
h'd N t"" P uri ^ ant to tne Statute, he was held to be no Inhabitant within their Pa-
fufficient r '' n » notwithstanding fuch Certificate, and of that Opinion was all the
within the Court. 3 Mod. 247. Mich. 3 Jac. 2. B. R. The King v. the Inhabi-
Intent of the tants f Maiden.
Statute, tho'
not within the Letter ; becaufe the affejpng this Man to the Parifi Rates, and receiving the Money ajfeffed
is a fufficient Evidence that they knew that he was an Inhabitanc there> and the Meaning of the Statute
is no other. Show. 12 S. C. by Name of the iS-U'tO, t>. ^apnc, lays, Thar the Court held that it
gain'd a good Settlement, tho' there was no Notice in Writing given to the Church wardens of his
coming, and that comirg in publickly by taking a Houfe, and being rated in the Poor's Rates, and lb
obferved by the Officers of the Pariih in their Pariih Books is fufficient Notice, and the rather becaule
by the Preamble it is apparently meant only againft Private and Clandestine Removals, and not Publick ones,
of which the Parifh takes Notice it lilt. 2 Shaw's Pract. Jul!. 5; cites S C- Juft. Cafe
Law. 240. cites S. C. Dak. Jult. cap 75. cites S. C. Shaw's Pariih Law 234. cites S. C.
« 1 Foley's Poor Laws 10S, i;y. cites S. C.
3- 3#
Settlement of the Poor. 377
1 — — ■— ■- — ■■■■■' -' -■■■— ■' ■■■' ■- ■■- — —1
3. 3 & 4 W. & M. cap. 11. S. 3. Enaits, That the 40 Days Continuance
of a poor Perfon, intended by the Alls to make a Settlement, /hall be accounted
J?om the Publication of a Notice in Writing, which he pall deliver, of the
Houfe of his Abode, and the Number of his Family, to the Church-warden
or Over far of the Poor, which Notice, the Church-warden or Overfeer is re-
quired to caufe to be read public kly immediately after Divine Service in the
Church, on the next Lord's Day ; and the Church-warden or Overfeer is to
regifter the [aid Notice in the Book, kept for the Poor's Account.
4. None but a Peribn removeabie is to give Notice; becaufe they can- Poor's Set- .
not be dill tub d ; As one that rents iol. per Ann. a Servant &c. 2 Salk. tle â„¢ cntsi 9|*
4-3. Trin. 8 W. 3. B. R. in the Cafe of St. Nicholas v. St Helen's [Iks s.'c. 5 -^
Parilh. Netfjuft.
543. cites
s c Juft. Cafe Law 239. cites S. C. S P. Dak. Juft. cap. -3. S. P. Per Hole Ch,
J. Comb. 3S2 Anon.
5. II* a Parilh into which a Perfon comes, takes Notice of him, and Poor's Set-
looks on himfelf as one of the Parilh, as by relieving him, making him dements 192.
an Officer cKc. There alter a long Continuance, we would have Jtrefitmed c f^.' s § ' d_J,
Nritice given, becaufe the Notice need not be exa&ly proved j For the Nelf. Juft.
Church-warden to whom it was given, and the Witnelies atteiting the 543. cites
Matter, may be dead, but in the principal Cafe it was returned on the ^ *jj
Order, that he Clandeltinely removed himfelf, fo that he might eahly jf 3w ~f
-Continue in the fame Manner; wherefore in fuch Cafes we rriiift conftrue e itcs SC4
the Statute ftriftly. 2 Salk. 473. Trin. 8 W. 3. B. R. St. Nicholas v. Dalt juft.
St. Helen's Parilh. c ?p- 73-
cites S. C.
6. Holt Ch. J. f.'.idj if a poor Man had been r elievedfeveral Tears in a Poor's Ser-
Pari/h, he mould prelume Notice in Writing; but it is but Evidence to dements 194,
the juiliccs. Comb. 382. Trin. 8 \Y. 3. B. R. Anon. g L *»• cue *
Shaw's Paiifii Law 231. cites S. C.
•7. A. and his Wife were removed by two Juftices to B. where he had Shaw'sPa r
cifed the Trade of a Smith for a Tear, and work'd for, and was *con- nIh . w
ilantly employed by, moll of the Inhabitants of B. and by the Lord of g q < ~ lK *
the Manor, and the Jultices of Peace there. This Order was reverfed Poor's Sw-
at Seflions, and both Orders return'd in B. R. reciting the Special Mat- tlementsi-S.
ter, that he was Apprentice in D. and that he had not given any Notice £'{£"' T r j?'
in Writing, nor was aliened, nor bore any publick Office in B. and now cites SC by
the Order of Seffions was confirmed ; For tho' fuch Things might have Name of
been allowed before the late Act, yet now it being an Explanatory Aft Blood's Cafe,
muft not be enlarged by Equity, and we are confin'd to it. Comb. 410. ~~ ~7~$f$y\
Hill. 9 W. 3. B. R. Fofton v. Dalbury Parilh. 59?; ™% £
S. C. by '
Name of Dalbury v. Foften Parifliioners 5 Mod. 330, 331. S. C'
* This publick Notice taken by the Parilh might perhaps have fatisfied the Statute t Jac. 2. but
there being Doubts concerning the Notice prefcrib'd by that Act, the 3 & 4 W. 8c M. was made to
explain it, and this later Statute has particulam'd the Notice, and what fhall be tantamount to it, and
w hat not; this is not among the Particulars of the Statute; For which Reafon the Order was con -
firmed. 2 Salk. 4:6. .Hill, b W. 3. B. R. S.C. by Name of the Inhabitants of Talbury v. the Hamlet
bfFoflon InScropton Nelf. Juft. 543. cites S. C. Dalt. Juft. cap. ;;. cites S.C. 1 —
Foley's Poor Laws 114. S.C.
8. Payment of the Land 'Tax hath been held fufficient Notice, where Poor's Set-
charg'd as paid in a Parochial Limit, tho' not a Parochial Tax. Per Holt foments '.: '•>•
Ch. J. Comb. 410. Hill. 9 W, 3. B. R. in Cafe of Follon v. Dalbury % c ' T*
Parilh, alias Blood's Cafe. Mod, ,, 0>
351. S.C. by
Name of Dalbury v. Foifton Parimioners cites it as held in the Cafe of Ipfvvich — = i — Payment of
Taxes is equivalent to a Notice in Writing. 2 Salk. 523. Mich. 7 W. 3. B. R. Talborn v. Bofton Pa-
rifhes. Poor'v Settlements 1S0. pi. 223. cites S. C 2 Shaw's Pratt Juft. 53. cites S. C.
5 D . o. It
37«
Settlement of the Poor.
Foley's Poor 9- It was moved to quafh an Order of Settlement tor that the only
Laws 1 15. Ground of fettling a poor Perfon in a Pariih appears upon the Order td
vS ; C. j uve i.cen, that the Banns of Matrimony of the poor Perfon were publifh'd
^-Jt'* m the Parijh Church - 9 which is ill ; For the Notice given to the Parift
S . C. mult not only be in Writing, but the other Ceremonies required by the
Tuft. Cafe 3 cv 4 W. cv M. mull be oblerved, and that Act being an Explanatory
La* 239. / iCt C;in not be taken by Equity ; and the Order was quath'd, per Cur. j
s"p DalrT ^ lod - 4^4- Mich. xl ^ • 3> The Kir 'g v - the Inhabitants of Chertfey.
J'jfi. cap. 73 .
> s . C citci I0 - One A 7 ", left his Wife and Children upon a T J arijh, and gave a War-
I ! j re |. rant of Attorney to the Officers of the Pariih to take and feife his Goods, and
MS. Gates afterwards lived 40 £)^cj /'« rfo Parijh. And it was held, that the VVar-
13 'r S .', X '] n r ' lIlt was a § ooc * ^°^^ m Writing to the Officers, and that the Party's
Cafcofthe living there 40 Days after had gained him a Settlement. MS. Cafes pi.
Oucen v. the 44. cites it as cited by Eyre J. MS. Rep. 175. Newel's Cafe.
Inhabitants
of St. Mary Arches, and the Inhaliitants of the Parifli of Honiton.
S P. Per 11, The Notice to be given according to the Statute does not extend to a
H °M C ] 1 -is S e> ' va ' lt > or an Apprebtite ; Per Powis. 11 Mod. 205. Hill. 7 Ann. B. R.
in C-.dc of m Cafe of the Pariih of St. Giles v. Wey bridge Pariih.
the Pariih of
St. Albans v. the Parifh of St. Botolph's Bifhopfgate. S P. Per Holt Ch. J. becaufe the Tufticc»
6f react, tho' there had been Notice, cannot difturb him. 12 Mod. 441. Hill 12W. 3 B. R. Anon.
Mr Foley I2 . An Order of 2 Juftices for Removal of one John Crosby and Sufan
lays, itis ob- h ; s YSTife, from the Pariih of Aldenham to Abbots Langley. The Order
this Cafe and c t Scffions Jiated the Faff Specially, viz. That about 40 2 ears ago, John
the Cafe of Crosby took a Hotife in Aldenham, with the Knowledge of the Chart h-war-
the King y. dens and Overfeers, and kept a Shop, and lived unmolejied till this Order of
thelnhabi- R m0 c ja i i that he came into the Pari/b after the firft of Jac. the id. thac
d'cnVuprapl" °" f ^ e S { h. of Offober 1688. the J ajlices granted him a Licence for buying
z. were and felling Ccrn • that he kept a Pnblick Alehoufe in Aldenham for 35 or
only upon 36 2 ears, which was publickly known to the Pariih Officers, that he had
the Claufe j; ve children born and chrifrened in the Parijh ; that he was placed in a Seat
tute of the '* f ^ e F'arijh Church by the Church-wardens ; that he did Watch and Ward,
1 jac. ?..S. 3. and ferved as a Juryman at Court Leets, and every Year worked in the
which re- Highways, or paid Money to the Surveyors to be escufed; And the Jingle
iu.resNo- j>oiat was. Whether this did tantamount to a Notice in Writing, 10 as
oneofthe° to § am a Settlement after the 1 ft. Jac. 2. It was inlifted thac it wasj
Church- and the Court ordered them to ihew Caufe ; Afterwards the Rule was
wardens or made abfolute, That it did tantamount to a Notice in Writing fufficienr.
Overfeers; t0 g a j n a Settlement. Foley's Poor Laws no. &c. Hill. 2 Geo. 2. B. R.
we're deL- The Parifli of Aldenham v. Abbots Langley.
mined upon
a Perfbn's coming into a Parifli before the Statute of 3 & 4 W. & M. was made ; but fince the 3 & 4.
W. & M. cap. 11.S 3. by which it is required, That fuch Notice in Writing fhall not only be deli-
vered to a Church-warden or Overfeer, but that he fhall read, or caufe it to be read publickly in the
Church &c. [fee pi. 3] he takes it, the Law is different upon this Claufe, being an .Explanatory
Claufe, than it was upon the Claufe of the 1 Jac. z. as by thefe Cafes it appears. Ibid.
(G) l&yfcrving Offices.
I. JD Y 1 & j-W. & M. cap. 1 1. S. 6. //' any Perfon, who fhall come to in-
Jj habit in any Town or Parijh, pall on his own Account execute any
Public k Annual Office in the Town or Parijh during one I~ta.r 3 hejhall bejadfd
to have a legal SeUlem-ent i* the fame-/
2. A
Settlement of the Poor. - 379
2. A Scavenger or * Conjiable gains a Settlement in that Parifh where Shaw's Pa-
he lives, akho' his Office is not Parochial, but a Precinct Office, and ^ Law
confin'd to more Pariihes than one. Poor's Settlements 3. pi. 4. Hill. s r c ' , ;
17 10. B. R. The Pariih of St. Lawrence v. St. Mary's in Reading. A Man is to
be fettled in
that Parifh where, he is an Inhabitant., tho' he exercifes his Office in other P tripes. As if there be fevsral
Vo-tVTis in one Parifh that miu?:t„h: il-ch- ezcn Ptor, and there is one Officer for them all, and a Man is chofen
Clurch-ivarden of all the ffottttrt ; yet he fhall lie fettled in that Town only where lie lives. The Sta-
tute as to :'â– â– ) - 'â– . (* a Town or Parifh) but as to tic P, ymei .' of the Taxes, it is (of a Town or
Parifh" 1 . And rone is a Pariih Officer but an Oveneer or Church- warden, and yet a Conftable or Ti-
thiiv-man are Annual Officers within a Parifh within the Statute. So of a Conftable for the Pfitndred
which is for feveraf Parilhes. So of a Man's doiu^ the Office of a Scavenger*, that would gain a Settle-
ment ; For the doing of the Offices makes a Man Notorious, and is equivalent to Notice. MS. Cafes.
Mich! 9 Ann. B. R. S. C.
* It was laid, That doing the Office of Conftable has been held a Settlement, tho' he is chofe in the
Leet and not by the Pariih: Yet he is cnecmed an Officer, and is bound to do feveral Parochial
Things. But Parker Ch J. laid, That that was the Cafe of the jQUEfU i). §>l)iYlS tgaletf, the Leet .
and the Parifh were the fame, and Prima facie Parifh and Vill are taken to be fame. Cited MS.
Cafes Mich. 9 Ann. B. R. ii: S. C— But die ferving the Office of Confiabli as Deputy to another
dors not sjain a Settlement; For what he di*.-s, is in another's Right. MS. Cafes Hill. 6 Ann. The In-
liabkants'of Lothibme v. Sherifl Biles
3 Serving the Office of Churchwarden for a Borough, Otihkb vompre- Foley's Poo*
bends feveral Pafifies is a Settlement in that Pariih within the laid %°- cit ™sc.'-+
rough wherein he lived at the Time of fuch Service, tho' he was not SIl3w>s p^
chofen by that Pariih onlv., and tho' he exercifed his Office thro' the rifh Law-
whole Borough. 10 Mod! 13. Mich. 9 Ann. B.R. St.Mary's Pariih in 23* cites
Reading v. St. Lawrence in Reading. p' oor . s Set
tlonea to oe ;> amen vj »». u;ri» S r. , ^ .. ....... . -1 - * v _..... , — - - -
Tuftice's of the Borough &c. but he is not to execute his Office in one Pariih only, but all over the Borough.
And the Court was much divided, Whether this war. a Settlement, or not ? Bscauie he was not elected
into this Office by the Parifh, neither was the Exercife of his Office confined to t ie Pariih ; yet he is
a publick Officer, and his Office is partly exercifed within the Parifh ; Co that the Parifhioners muff take
Notice of him. 'And per Cur. it was held a good Settlement, being within the exprefs Words of the
Statute of executing an Office in a Town or Pariih. Hill. 9 Ann. B. R. S. C.
a. The Queftion was, Whether one appointed Clerk of the Parifi by ?/?? Nelf Juft.
♦, T^ _._{__ A„ rvr..., :;... „ V ,».,,. rt,~„M , T ,;o „ l.n-,1
ment
cute
not an Annual Office. To which it was anfvvered, That the Intent olcitesS.C.—
the Act was, That no Office under an Annual one ihoald gain a Settle- Jj^JJJ^
ment & Majus continet in fe Minus ; And that on the General Nomina- pI . 24l cite *
tion to the Office of Pariih Clerk he is in lor Lite, and is an Officer by s. C ,
the Common Law; And lb it was ruled, abfente Parker Ch. J. 2 Salk.*bid \6: pi.
536. Hill. 10 Ann. B.R. Gatton Pariih v. Milwich Pariih. i-'n sic,
Where it was infilled. That this is not an Annual Office unlcfs he comes in by thcConfent of the Parifh ;
For at this "rate the Parfon may put him in one Day and put him out another, and fo bring an infinite
Charge upon the Parifh But the Court held, That this was not an Office only, but a Freehold, and :i
Mandamus lies to rcftore him. 'Tis true, if he is fstfr and has a Family they may remove him, but if
they let him contir.tie a Tear none can remove him , For altho' lie cime in by the Parfon only, yet the Pa-
rifh paying him is aConfent and Approbation — 1 Shaw's Pra&.Jufh 5^ cites Mich. 1711. S.C by
Name of Gayton v. Milwich. S. P. Dalt. Jul! cap j;. » Shaw's Parifh Law zjz. cites S C
—~- Foley's Poor Laws 12;. Hill. 9 Ann. B.R. S C. lays, It was refolv d, That a Pariih Clerk, be
he chofe by Parfon or Parifh, is fuch a.i Officer as gains a Settlement within the Aft of 3 & 4 W. Sc
M. cap 11.
5. It was held, That a Perfon who was chofen a fitbiitgman, for a Poor's Set-
Year, and fenes that Year, was fuch an Officer as gained a Settlement Jj"^ 7
within the Aft of 3 ck 4 W. &M. Foley's Poor Laws 123, 124. Hill bv Name of
2 Geo in B R The Pariih of St. Trinity, London, v. the Pariih olthc Parifh of
Gariington, Oxfordihire. qSXS?
Trinitv in London ; and reports it,That ^Certificate Matt went intoGaffington, and was elethdTttblngmaiTi
and fm/ed the Vlhoh 1 car, but was not fworn into the Office till Half a Tear ajter. The Order was dr â– â– 1
3 So Settlement of the Poor.
up fpccially and brought inro B. R. but it was quafh'd for want of Form ; but the Court were of Uni-
ts to the Merits, That the Man gained aSettlement inGaffmgton,3li Settlements being expounded
favourably, liberally, and moll beneficially for poor People. Note, The Aft fays, Legally admitted into
«pv Annual Office. Poor's Settlements 72. pi. y 5. Pafch. 1 Geo. B. R. The Panfh of GaTington in
Oxon v. St. Trinity in Londo:i.
Poor's Set- 6. It was refblved per tot. Cur. That a Collector of Births and Burials
dements 94. wa3 a fufficient Officer to gain a Settlement within the A£t of 3 cv 4 \V ".
Adiudg'd i & M - Foley's Poor Laws 124. Trin. 5 Geo. B. R. between Biiham&
igly Cook.
per Oar. The
Ki:g v. Hawkins Shaw's Parifh Law 237. cites S.C.
s c Removal fH) By Orders. What Orders fhall bs faid Comlufivs
or Final ; And what fhall be . faid an Afcertaining a
Settlement.
2 Shaw's i.TT was moved to fet afide an Order of Seffions for tint of d
Jurh I p oor p er foa in a Town, who had betnfent thii int of 2
S*C- " Uei t f ! 'ft ices '■> A°d 1C was confirmed on an Appeal to the Seffions. But the
bait. iuft. Court would hear nothing of the Merits of the Caufe, the Order of the
348. cap. 73 Seffions being in fuch Cafe final, unlefs there were an Error in tin i orm.
cites S C. Vent. 310. Pafch. 29 Car. 2. B. K. Anon.
. Shaw s
Parifh Law 19-. cites S.C.
2. By 3 £# 4 IV. & M. cap. 1 1. S. 9. It is provided, 7'hat if any Perfotis
find themfelves aggrieved ly any Determination which any Jufiices of Peace
fhall make in the Cafes [therein] aforefaid^ they fhall have Liberty to a\
to the next General jgaarter-Seff/'ons of tie Peace for the faid County, Ridings
or Divi/ion, City or Town Corporate ; who, upon full Hearing of the faid
Appeal, pall have full Power finally lo determine the fame.
z Shaw's 3. An Order was made to remove a poor Woman from Tarly in Worcef-
Praft. Juft. terfhire to Swolbilt in I \ : Afterwards 2 â– in Wan
s'c 2 — ltCS mac * e an Order to to King's- Norton' inW\ . J . pon
Keif Tuft. z Jufiices cf Worcefterfhire fent her back to Swell ill : And upon an Appeal
54.7. cites to the Seffions in Warwickfhire the Jultices confirmed her' . at
$■£■■- — King's- Norton, and then an Order was made by 2 Jullices of the Peace
S-I fh L* Pa ~ t0 execute l ' as ^ a 'd Order. All thefe Orders being brought up by Cer-
105. cites tiorari it was moved to quafh all except the fir ft, all the others being
S. C. — made Coram non Judice ; For when an Orignal Order is made, it binds all
If en appeal Pcrfons until it be ft afide ; and it cannot be fet aiide but on Appeal to
a J"'f " the Seffions. It was on the other Hand inhfted, That tho' in this Cafe
laft legal ' 2 J uftices could not lend the Woman back again to Yarlcy yet they
Place of Set- might fend her to a 3d Place, as King's-Norton is in this Cale ; fo that
tlement of a as to King's-Norton 'tis but an Original Order : But the Court feemed
poor Perfon, t0 j^ Q £ another Opinion: For then King's-Norton might fend to Yar-
that Panto is ■, ,, i i i ,/->■■-n r °- ■i • ^ r
concluded * e Y> unc * there would be a perpetual Circuity: But leeing in this Cale
thereby, not King's-Norton had appeared at the Seffions, and had been concluded
only as to there, they would not qualh the Order. And feveral other Questions
the Parifh arifing, all was referred to a Judge of Affife. 2 Salk. 481, 482. Hill,
trom which ..r 1 -' n n f,,, r . . . -» y. rr . , -> T ■«*.-• ~ c n -n
the firftOr- ? ♦' 3- ■". rv. The Inhabitants ot Kings-Norton in\\ igorn v. Svvolhill
der of Re- in Warwickshire.
muval was,
but alio as to all ether Parijbu; Per Cur. 12 Mod. 419. Mich. It W. 3. B R. The Kin^ v. the In-
habiunts of Longcritcb.il.
4. Ic
Settlement of the Poor. q8i
4. It is a ltanding Rule in B. R. That if upon an Appeal the Order of 2 Shaw's
two Jtijhccs is cither affirmed or quafhed upon the Merits oi the Caule in re- Praa . J uff -
Jation to Settlements, it ihall be concluhve between the 2 Pariliies. 2 54- cutaSG
Shaw's Pract. Juft. 25. cites Patch: 10 Ann. Bilhop YValham v. Foram. Dalt. Juft.
cap. 75. -
Shaw's Parifli Law 197. cues S. C. Ibid 250. cites S. C. MS. Cafes, pi. 55. S. C reports
the lit Order dated n March 171S. and that the Quarter-Seflions was in April, and the 2d Order was
made in November. Tnefe Orders being removed it was objected, That the laft Order was void be-
fcauic the firft Order being quafhed it was conclufive between the 2 Parifhes, and that thexe being nt
'Fault in tbejtrft Order it mult be intended to be qtiaped apon the Merits : And to this the Court agreed, and
that the Seliions can only vacate or affirm ; And if this Order here had adjudged BifhopW altham to
be the laft Place of legal Settlement it would have been naught. And per Eyre T. It this Order had.
been confirmed it had been co'iclufive to all Parifhes ; But Parker Ch. J. asked, How we can rake No-
tice but that there might be an intermediate Settlement between tie lltb of March and November? that the
Matter before the t ith of March has been heard, and why mould we take it that this laft Ord - 'â– v/ds
marie upon a frefli Settlement. Et Adjornatur. Foley's Poor Laws 2; 5, i-d. S C. by Nam< of
hifhop's- Walton v Fareham in the County of Southampton, reports, That the poor Perfbn was Cent 1
fuftices jrom B toF. — F. appeals to the rexr Seflions, where the Order v/as qtiaped; then one of the ?»/?;-
\es who made the firft Order, with another Jultice, made a new Order and removed him again from B.to F.
and p. appeals, and the SeJJiens confirm the Order. It was objected, That this is wrong ; For the firft De-
termination at the Seflions is firal between thole 2 Pantries, and the Juftices had no Power to make a
ad Order. Curia ; Unlets the Pauper Iwd gained a new Settlement in the Parifli of F. the Juftices
could make no new Order, and the new Order mult be quafhed.
5. Upon an Order made 30 Tears ago on the Parifli of Budworth for -Main- Poor's Ser-
tenance of a Bajfard Child bom in the Townihip of Dumply within that tlementtijj:
Parilh, which Order was now removed before the Court by Certiorari, t c° 7 CKe *
It was held ill, That an Order made by 2 Juftices on the Overfeers of a
Pariih tor railing a Surn towards the Maintenance of a Baltard or poor
Perfbn does not determine the Settlement of the Perfon to be in that Pa-
rilh ; becaufe that is not contended, but prefumed. 2dly, That the Claufe
in the Statute 13 & 14 Car. 2. cap. 12. which provides, 'That dijhnti
Townfiips in large Parifhes in the Northern Countries pall reflectively
provide for their Poor under the Penalty in 43 Eliz. cap. 2. mttft be under-
flood with refpect to the Maintenance of poor and impotent Perfons, and
not with refpetl to Baflards. 1 Salk. 122. pi. 8. Hill. 5 Ann. B. R. Bud-
worth v. Dumpley.
6. A Man, his Wife and 5 Children, were removed by an Order of two
Juftices from A. to B. that being adjudged the Place of their laft legal
Settlement. The Order was quafhed on Appeal to the next Quarter-Sehi-
ons, and the Man and his Family came back to A. and were removed
again to B. by another Order, which being removed by Certiorari into
B. R. it was by Content of Parties referred to the Judge of Apife, who
direfted a Trial on a feigned Ifj'ue ; and at the next Aiiifes B. had a Verdicl,
and fo both the former Orders were quafhed. But A. being diffatisiied
with the Verdift procured the Parijh Officers of C. to let the Man and Fa-
mily to dwell in a Tenement there on Prtrpofe that C. might remove him to
B. which was after done by Order of 2 Juftices, which Order was con-
firmed on an Appeal to the next Seliions ; fo that now A. was difcharged
of him ; becauie an Order confirmed on Appeal makes a good Settlement in
that Pariih by whom the Appeal is brought againlt all other Parifhes
whatfoever. The Court would not qualh the Order, but made a Pvule
for the Pariih Officers of C. to ihew Caufe why an Attachment lhould not
go againft them, but thought that when they came to fliew Caufe they
might confent to have the Orders qualh'd : But they fhew'd no Caufe,
and fo the Rule was made abfolute. 8 Mod. 200. Mich. 10 Geo. Wro-
tham Pariih in Surrey v. St. Olaves.
5 E (I) By
g#2 Settlement of the Poor.
( I ) iBy Parents Settlement ; And Orders relating