The King against The Inhabitants of Stoke Damerel
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 25 January 1837 |
| Date | 25 January 1837 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 112 E.R. 117
IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH
S. C. 1 N. & P. 453; 6 L. J. M. C. 55. Considered, R. v. Westbury-on-Trym, 1857, 7 El. & Bl. 451.
[308] the king against the inhabitants of stoke damerel. Wednesday, January 25th, 1837. Since stat. 1 W. 4, c. 18, a settlement may still be acquired by payment of rates in respect of a tenement, part of which is underlet, if the requisites of stat. 6 G. 4, c. 57, s. 2, be fulfilled. [S. C. 1 N. & P. 453; 6 L. J. M. C. 55. Considered, R. v. Westtury-on-Trym, 1857, 7 El. & Bl. 451.] On appeal against an order of justices removing Thomas Pearce from the parish of Stoke Damerel to the parish of Plympton Maurice, both in Devonshire, the sessions quashed the order, subject to the opinion of this Court on the following case. The pauper had gained a settlement in Plympton Maurice. After having gained such settlement, and after the passing of stat. 1 W. 4, c. 18, he rented a house in Stoke Damerel, at a rent of 161. a year, paid his year's rent, was rated for the house to the parochial rates, and paid such rates: but, during the whole of his tenancy, he had underlet a portion of the house, of the value of 41. a year, to one Knapmati. It was contended by the appellants that, although the pauper, having underlet, was prevented by the statute from gaining a settlement in Stoke Damerel by his renting, yet he had gained a settlement there by payment of parochial rates. The question for the opinion of the Court was, whether the pauper did so gain a settlement in Stoke Damerel. J. Greenwood, in support of the order of sessions. This is a good settlement, under stat. 3 & 4 W. & M. c. 11, s. 6, which enacts, "That if any person, who shall come to inhabit in any town or parish," " shall be charged with and pay his share towards the public taxes or levies of the said town or parish, then he shall be adjudged [309] and deemed to have a legal settlement in the same," though no notice be published. Then stat. 35 G. 3, c. 101, s. 4, enacts that "no person or persons whatsoever, who shall come into any parish, township, or place, shall gain a settlement in (a) Littledale J. was absent. 118 THE KING V. STOKE DAMEREL 6 AD. ft E. 310. such parish, township, or place, by being charged with and paying his, her, or their share towards the public taxes or levies of the said pariah, township, or place, for and on account, or in respect of any tenement or...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
The Queen against The Inhabitants of St. Mary Kalendar
...the requisitions of stat. 1 W. 4, c. 18, as to occupying the tenement, may not have been complied with ; Rex v. Stoke [629] Damerel (6 A. & E. 308). Now, under the former statute, a constructive occupation was sufficient; the stricter rule took its rise from the introduction of tbe word "ac......
-
The Queen against The Inhabitants of Brighthelmstone
...to both kinds, the scope of the enacting part is evidently restrained to that which is mentioned in the title. Sex v. Stoke Damerel (6 A. & E. 308). That the title may be used to explain an act is shewn by Sates v. Pilling (2 C. & M. 374), where Bayley B. makes use of it to explain the Vexa......
-
The Queen against The Inhabitants of Westbury on Trym
...as to the effect of the enactments in jthe various statutes upon the two kinds of settlement, appears from Rex v. Stoke Damlerel (6 A. & E. 308) and Rex v. Ditcheat (9 B. & C. 176). [Crompton J. The questjion in Rex v. Ditcheat (9 B. & C. 176) was, what constituted an occupation.] The ^ase ......