2. By 13, Geo. 2. c. 18. “ no fuch "certiorari thall be granted unless "applied for in fix calendar months "after fach proceedings had or made, and unlefs it be duly proved on oath, that the party fuing forth the fame hath given fix days notice thereof in writing to the justice or juftices, or two of them, before whom fuch proccedings have been, to the end that they may few cause against "the iffing fuch certiorari, · ii. 869. pl. 851 3. It is a general rule, that where the law has limited an appeal against an order, fuch order cannot be removed until after appeal, i. 52. Fl. 58. 4. Same point, Rex v. Milverton, ii. 870. pl. 853 5. But certiorari lies to remove an appointment of overfeers before appeal under the 43. Eliz. unlefs the appeal be lodged, Warick's Cafe, i. 52. pl. 59 6. And if the certiorari be filed it is too late to objet, ii. 870. pl. 834 7. But as the 17. Geo. 2. ¿. 18. has now limited the appeal to the next fellions, fach certiorari does not lie until after the next feffions, as it would prevent the appeal, Rex v. Holditch, i. 53. pl. 60 8. A certiorari will not lie to remove a poor-rate, Rex v. Uttoxeter, i. 9. 251. pl. 247 has not appealed Although the party 10. But a certiorari will lie to remove 13. An order of baftardy removed by certiorari in due time may be quashed for objections on the face of it without a previous appeal to the fellions, Rex v. Stanley, i. 448. pl. 617 14. A certiorari to remove an order of removal appealed against may be directed to the fefions, and returned by them, Rix v. Warminfter, ii. 87c. pl. 855 15. If a convidion be returned to the feillons, the juftices may return a copy of it to a certiorari, Rex v. Eaton, ii. 870. zatis COAL-MINES. The occupiers of coal-mines are rateable to the poor, i. 57. pl. 63 COMMITMENT. 1. A commitment under the vagrant aft is a commitment in execution, Rex v. Brooke, i. 335. pl. 425 2. But by 9. Geo. 1. c. 7. f. 2. no officer of any parish, except "upon fudden and emergent occa"fions, fhall bring to the account "of the parish any monies that he fhall give to any poor perfon of "the fame parish who is not REGISTERED," ‚"i. 256. pl. 260 3. By 24. Geo. 2. c. 44. no action 4. fhall be brought against any "conftable or other officer, or against any perfon acting in his aid, until the forms pre"fcribed by the act have been "complied with," i. 284. pl. 316 Overfeers and churchwardens may be indicted for refufing to make a rate to reimburfe conftables, &c. Rex v. Barlow, i. 294. pl. 339 5. By 17. Geo. 2. c. 5. f. 2. “the duty of conftables, refpecting perfons who fhall run away and leave "their families chargeable to the "parish, defcribed," i. 332. pl. 4:8 "of all fums expended by him on "account of the parish," i. 375. pl. 468 "the 7. By 18. Geo. 3. c. 19. f. 4. "overfeers fhall within the next "fourteen days after the account"delivered, lay the fame before "the inhabitants, and, if approved, "fhall pay the fame out of the "poor-rates," i. 376. pl. 469 8. By 18. Geo. 3. c. 19. f. 4. " if "the account fhall be difallowed, "the overfeers fhall deliver it "back to the conftable, who may exhibit the fame to a juflice of "the peace, giving reafonable no"tice thereof to the overfeers; "and the justice fhall hear and "determine on the objection made "to the account, and fettle the "fum due, and enter the fame in "the account, and fign his name "thereto; and then the overfeers are authorized to pay the fame out of the monies raised by the "poor's-rate," i. 376. pl. 470 9. But by 18. Geo. 3. c. 19. f. 5. "the overfeers may appeal against "fuch account to the next general giftrates of every corporation in "the kingdom, being juftices of "the peace, fhall have the fame "authority in matters reipecting "the poor within the limits and "precincts of their refpective ju"rifdictions, as well out of feffions as at their feffions, as by this act is given to county juftices; and no other juftice hall meddle "there," i. 2. pl. 4 65 2. By 43. Eliz. c. 2. " every alderman of the corporation of L'on"don thall have the fame autho rity as is given to one or two "justices by this act," i. 3. pl. 5 3. By 43. Eliz. c. 2. f. 9. "if a parih lie in two counties, or part "within a corporation and part without, the magiftrates and juf tices of each place refpectively "fhall only deal and intermeddle "in fo much of the parish as lies within their feveral juriflic"tions," i. 3. pl. 6 4. The above claufes do not confine the appointment of overfeurs to the mayor or other head-officer of a corporation, Rex v. Butler, i. 11. pl. 27 5. Nor can one magistrate of a corporation and one juftice of a county join to do an act required to be done by two of them refpectiveButler, ly, Rex v. i. 10. pl. 27 6. But quere, if there fhould be only one juftice in a county, or magiftrate in a corporation, whether fuch one may not act in cafes where two are required, ibid. i. 11. pl. 27 7. By 9. Geo. 1. c. 7. f. 3. “jus"tices for a county living in any city that is a county of itfelf fituated within the county at large, may make orders, &c." i. 201. notis 10. A poor's-rate made by magiftrates of a corporation cannot be allowed by juftices for a county, Rex v. Folly, i. 6z. pl. 80 11. Same point, Rex v. St. Mary Taunton, i. 223. pl. 228 12. The parishes in a corporation cannot be rated in aid by county jultices, Rex v. St. Benedia, i. 310. pl. 374 13. A corporation may be rated to the poor in respect of a toll, although part of fuch toll is to maintain the mayor, Rex v. Wickbam, i. 93. pl. 129 14. So a corporation feifed of lands in fee for their own profit are within the meaning of the 43. Eliz. c. 2. inhabitants or occupiers of fuch lands, and in refpe&t thereof liable in their corporate capacity to be rated to the poor, Rex v. Gardner, i. 118. pl. 159 15. See Rex v. Cardington, i. 155. pl. 263 16. See Rex v. Dock Company of Hull, i. 165.. pl. 276 17. So a barge-way and toll-gate purchafed by the corporation of London, by virtue of an act of parliament for more effectually completing the navigation of the Thames, and empowering the corporation to levy tolls and duties towards the charges of the navigation, are rateable to the poor, Rex v. Mayor of London, i. 194. pl. 189 18. But a corporation erected by act of parliament for the purpofe of managing a navigation, and authorized to take certain tolls, the whole of which are directed to be applied to public purpofes, is not rateable to the poor in refpect of fuch tolls, Rex v. Salters Navigation i. 615. pl. 858 19. Nor i. By 17. Geo. 2. c. 38. 2. Same point as to poor's rate, i. 218. pl. 216 66 " on an action 3. By 7. Jac. 1. c. 5. against any parifh-officer, if the "verdict, &c. fhall be in his favour, he fhall have double cofls," i. 282. pl. 311 "and if 4. By 24. Geo. 2. c. 44. "againit them, they fhall pay cofts "to the plaintiff," i. 284. pl. 316 5. If trefpafs be brought against overfeers after a voluntary delivery of goods, it is vexatious, and they fhall have treble damages and cofts, i. 285. pl. 319 Oakley v. Salter, 6. The ftatutes 7. Jac. 1. c. 5. and 7. And therefore if a parish-officer 9. To intitle an overseer, &c. to 1 16. By g. Geo. I. c. 7. f. pl. 775 9. if, "upon appeal against an order of "removal, the feffions fhall deter"mine in favour of the appellant, "that the pauper was unduly re"moved, the juftices may at the "fame feffions order and award to fuch appellant fo much money as fhall appear to the juftices to "have been reasonably paid by "the parish appealing, towards "the relief of the pauper, between "the time of the undue removal "and the determination of the appeal. To be recovered as "directed by 8. & 9. Will. 3. ii. 821. pl. 778 " C. 10." 18. But now the Court of King's Bench will grant a mandamus to the feffions, commanding them to allow fuch cofts and charges as appear to them juft and reafonable, St. Mary Nottingham v. Kirklington, ii. 867. pl. 846 19. An order of feflions directing cofts and charges to be paid need not flate the fums expended, Maidenbradley v. Wallingford, ii. 868. pl. 847 20. The feffions cannot order cofts on the mere adjournment of an appeal, Rex v. Stainsfield, ii. 868. pl. 848 21. Nor can they direct the costs to attend the event of another prefumed appeal, Rex v. Great Chart, ii. 868. pl. 849 22. If a feffions-cafe be fent down to be re-stated, and the profecutor abandon it when it is returned, the Court of King's Bench will discharge his recognizance for the cofts; but if he difpute the amended order they will not, Rex v. Edgeworth, ii. 868. pl. 850 17. Before the above ftatute 9. Geo. 1. CUSTOMARY HIRING. c. 7. the allowance of cofts upon an appeal from an order of removal was in the difcretion of the feffions, Rex v. Juftices of Nottingham, ii. 867. pl. 845 See SETTLEMENT BY HIRING AND SERVICE. DIS |