The Queen against Clayton
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1849 |
| Date | 01 January 1849 |
| Court | Court of the Queen's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 116 E.R. 1298
QUEEN'S BENCH
S. C. 18 L. J. M. C. 129; 13 Jur. 406. Discussed, In re Sandback School and Almshouse Foundation, [1901] 2 Ch. 323.
[354] the queen against clayton. 1849. On a question whether a district, anciently part of a parish, was entitled to have separate overseers, and to levy separate poor rates, either under stat. 13 & 14 C. 2, c. 12, s. 21, as being otherwise unable to have the benefit of stat. 43 Eliz. c. 2, or as being itself a parish or reputed parish within stat. 43 Eliz. c. 2, the sessions stated the following facts for the opinion of the Court, submitting it to the Court to draw such inferences from them as a jury might draw : the district has a boundary well denned, lies at the extremity of the parish, is 2135 acres in extent, has a population of 700 persons, and is distant about nine miles from the pariah church ; the parish, exclusive of the district, is 8020 acres in extent, and has a population of 1600 persons. Before the dissolution of the monasteries, the district had a chapel with a chantry and endowment of lands. The chapel and lands were granted by the Crown, in 31 Eliz., to trustees on certain trusts, in execution of which they had ever since nominated the minister of the chapel for license by the bishop, and paid over (a) Reported by H. Davison, Esq., and C. Blackburnt Esq. 13Q-B.SM. THE QUEEN V. CLAYTON 1299 the profits of the lands to such minister, without interference by the vicar of the pariah. The chapel, before 43 Eliz., had all parochial rights and sacraments, and two churchwardens, and its own burial ground. The district has never contributed to the repairs of the parish church ; has always had separate surveyors of highways, and a separate highway rate, and has not contributed to the parish highways; and has always had a constable. The titheable lands of the district have always paid tithes to the vicar; the minister of the district cbapel is supported by the above mentioned endowment, but has no tithes. With respect to the maintenance of the poor: the earliest known appointment of an overseer for the district was an appointment of one in 1738, This appointment of a single overseer was continued until 1785, when two were appointed; and there have been two ever since. Separate poor rates have always been made for the parish and the district; and the poor in each have been maintained separately as to outdoor relief. The amount in the pound raised has always been the same in both parish and district; the district either taking the amount already fixed by the parish, or consulting the parish as to the amount, accordingly as the district rate was made before or after the parish rate. There was no workhouse in the district; bub its poor were sent for in-door relief to the parish workhouse, and there maintained out of the parish rate. At the etui of the year, the officers of the parish and district settled accounts, and whichever had money beyond its own expenditure handed the balance to the other. The accounts of the district, after allowance by its own vestry, were submitted to the parish vestry for allowance; but not vice versa. Held, that the district waa not entitled to have separate overseers, either under stat. 13 & 14 C. 2, c. 12, s. 21, or as having been a parish or reputed parish at the time of the passing of stat. 43 Eliz. c. 2. [S. C. 18 L. J. M. C. 129; 13 Jur. 406. Discussed, In re, Sandbach School aiul Almshouse foundation, [1901] 2 Ch. 323.] On appeal against a poor rate made on the district of Whaplode Drove, in the parts of Holland, in the county of Lincoln, the sessions confirmed the rate, subject to a case, which was, in substance, as follows. Wbaplode Drove is a district the boundary whereof is well defined : it is situate aeross the southern extremity of Whaplode, in the parts of Holland, in the county of Lincoln. It comprises a village, a chapel with a chancel [355] to the same, and also a burying ground attached thereto, and about 2135 acres of land, and a population of about 700 souls; and is distant about nine miles from the parish church of Whaplode. Whaplode, exclusive of Whaplode Drove, contains about 8020 acres of land, with a population of about 1600 souls. The important parts of the case next following the above statements were thus abstracted in the judgment of the Court. " It appears that, before the dissolution of the monasteries, the abbot and convent of Crowlsind were lords of the manor of Whaplode, patrons of the church, and owners of the tithes; that there was then a chapel in the district of Whaplode Drove, with a chantry and endowment of lands. This chapel and the lands were granted by the Crown, in the 31st of Elizabeth, to certain persons, from whom they have been continued in trustees, on trusts to pay the rents and profits to the minister of the chapel ; and these trustees have on a vacancy always nominated a person to be minister, who has been licensed by the bishop. The vicar of Whaplode, the advowson of which vicarage belongs to the Crown, has never appointed, or in any way interfered with, the minister of the chapel. The chapel, before the passing of stat. 43 Elii!. c. 2, always had all parochial rights and sacraments, and its own churchwardens, two in number, separate from Wbaplode, and its own separate burial ground. The inhabitants of the district have never contributed, and do not contribute, to the repair of the church of Whaplode. There have been always separate surveyors of highways, and a separate rate for the district, which has not contributed to the other highways in the parish; and it has always had a [356J constable. The titheable lands of the district have always paid tithes to the vicar of Whaplode; but considerable part of the district is tithe free, having been abbey land. The minister is supported by the profits of the lands with which the chapel is endowed, but does not appear to have any tithes. It is admitted in the case that anciently the district was parcel of the 1300 THK QUEEN V. CLAYTON 13 Q. B. 367 parish. With respect to the maintenance of the poor, the earliest appointment (a)1 of an overseer is in the year 1738, when one of the inhabitants of the district was appointed overseer for the district; and the practice so continued till 1785, when two were appointed; and from that time there have been always two. Separate poor rates have constantly been made for the parish and for the district; and the poor in eack have been maintained separately, so far as out-door relief has been given; the amount in the pound has always been the same in both, the overseers of the district taking that amount which had been already fixed by the overseers of the parish when they made a rate subsequent to the parish, or consulting the overseers of the parish aa to the amount which they were about to fix when they made a rate prior to the parish. There was no workhouse in the district; but the poor of the district who required in-door relief were always sent to the workhouse of the parish, and there maintained by the overseers of the parish out of the rate levied by them (b). At the end of the year the overseers of the parish and of the district seem to have compared their respective accounts; [357] and whichever had money in hand beyond their own expenditure handed such money or balance to the other. The accounts of the overseers of the district, after being allowed by their own vestry, were submitted to the vestry of the parish and allowed by them, previous to their being exhibited before the justices, but not the accounts of the parish overseers vice versa "(a)2. The case stated, however, that, since the appointment of a district auditor under stat. 7 & 8 Viet, c. 101, that officer had refused to allow any such payments of balances by either district to the other. The case then stated that the rate appealed against was made on 20th April 1846, and assessed upon rateable property situate in Whaplode Drove only, and was of no greater amount than was required if Whaplode Drove ought by law to be separately rated for its own poor, but was higher than would have been required if there had been one uniform rate over both districts. The Poor Law Commissioners, by order of 23d November 1835, declared that eleven "parishes or places" named in their order, and among them Whaplode Drove and Whaplode (mentioned as numbers 10 and 11 of the said parishes, &o.), should be united for the administration of poor law relief by the name of " The Holbeach Union ;" and that a fixed number of guardians should be separately elected for each district of the said union : that the order had always been in force from 7th December [358] 1835, when it came into operation; and that Whaplode Drove and Whaplode had separately contributed to the common fund of the union in the proportions defined by the said order. The respondents contended that Whaplode Drove was, at the time of the passing of stat. 43 Eliz. o. 2, either actually or by reputation, a parish, and was therefore eatitled to have overseers appointed for it, and to maintain its own poor separately from Whaplode: or that, since stat. 13 & 14 Charles 2, c. 12, overseers had been appointed for Whaplode Drove under sect 21 of that Act. The question for the opinion of the Court was, whether Whaplode Drove, upon the grounds above mentioned, or any of them, was entitled to have overseers appointed for it, and to- maintain arid manage its own poor, and to have rates and assessments made and levied thereon for that purpose separately. The Court was to have all the power to draw inferences and conclusions from the facts stated which a jury upon the trial of a civil action would have. If the Court should be of opinion that the district of Whaplode Drove was so entitled, the rate was to be confirmed ; if the Court should be of a contrary opinion, to be quashed. (a)1 The Case stated that "it cannot be ascertained if any, or what number of...
To continue reading
Request your trial