REX. of another. An objection was taken, that it does not appear BOROUGHFEN. by the order but that Boroughfen is within the parish of St. John the Baptift, in aid of which they are rated.--PER CURIAM. You must fhew that Boroughfen is out of the Vide this cafe parish of St. John the Baptift, or the juftices have no jupost. page 308. risdiction: and for this objection the order was quashed.

An order made

by two juftices to contribute antil we fee fit to

order to the contrary," is bad.

700.

S. C. z Seff.

Car. 52.

364. Cafe of the Borough of Marlborough, Eafter, 12. Geo. 1. 16. Viner, 416.-An order was made by the justices of the borough for the parish of St. Peter's to pay to the officers of St. Mary twenty pounds weekly, "till we "the faid juftices fhall fee fit to order to the contrary." It was objected, FIRST, That it does not appear that the S. C. Strange, parish of St. Mary is overburthened with poor: but that was over-ruled, for the order follows the words of the ftatute. SECONDLY, It is faid, they are justices of the town S C. Foley, 59. and borough; and it appears upon the order, that the 5. C. 3. Burn, parith of St. Mary is within the borough, but not within the town and borough: but by the Court, they are justices of both. THIRDLY, The order is, " until we shall fee fit to order to the contrary;" whereas the act does not give the juftices any fuch authority, and it is in effect making a perpetual order; for if one of the justices die, or be removed, no other juftice can alter it: and it was quafhed upon this last objection.

An order directing the

levy a certain

365. The Cafe of the Parish of St. Peter and St. Paul, Trinity, r2. Geo. 2. Strange, 1114.-Two juftices, rechurchwardens citing the inability of St. Mary the Virgin to maintain its and overfeers to own poor, ORDER the churchwarden of St. Peter and fum is bad; for St. Paul to affefs, raife, and levy fixty pounds for the mainthe justices can- tenance of the poor of the other parish. An objection not delegate was made to their ordering fuch a grofs fum; but the their authority. Court, upon the authority of 1. Vent. 350. Salk. 480. Comb. 309. held it well in that refpect. But the order was quafhed, because the juftices had delegated their power of affeffing and rating the parishioners to the churchwardens and overfeers; whereas by 43. Eliz. c. 2. f. 3. the juftices are to make the rate on all or on particular perfons.

Viner, 341.

The juftices

III. Rating parishes within THE HUNDRED.

366. The Cafe of the Parish of St. Rumbald's, Mich. may rate parti 2. fac. 2. Skinner, 258.-In the argument on this cafe eular perfons it was faid, that the juftices may affefs particular persons; and a cafe was remembered in Pemberton's time, where it

within the UN

was

was fo ruled. In the cafe alfo of the borough of Banbury, CASE OF ST. determined the fame Term, HOLT, then Recorder, cited RUMBALD'S, the cafe of a parish in Cambridge, Mich. 32. Car. 2. in which, after having been divers times argued, it was determined, that the juftices might tax particular perfons of another parish where the proper parith is over-burthened.

367. Anonymous, Viner's Abr. title Poor, 431.-In a The next parish city, when one parifh is not able to relieve their poor, within the hunthe next parish, being able, is to aid them with a weekly dred is firft to allowance; but when the cause ceafes, fuch allowance is to cease alfo.

be rated in aid. Blakerby, 260.

368. Rex v. Eaftchurch, Hilary, 9. Will. 3. 2. Salk. 480. An original order was made at the quarter feffions, fet- particular perJustices may tax ting forth, that whereas the parish of Dimshurch was over- fons, or the burthened with poor, and that the parish of Eaftchurch whole parish. had no poor, the parish of Dimchurch fhould be annexed Comb. 242, to the parish of Eaftchurch, and that the occupiers of land 309. there fhould contribute twenty pounds per ann. by equal monthly payments, to Dimchurch, as long as that should be over-burthened with poor and Eaftchurch have none. To this order it was objected, that the juftices of peace cannot alter and annex parishes to one another; and fecondly, that the feffions cannot make an original order. -HOLT, Chief Justice. There are two ways by the 43. Eliz. c. 2. to make one parifh contribute to the maintenance of the poor of another, viz. the juftices may tax particular perfons in aid to that parish which cannot relieve its own poor, or they may affefs the whole parish in a certain fum, and leave it to the churchwardens, &c. to levy the fame on particular perfons, which was well done in this particular cafe; but fo much as concerns the annexing of parishes is void, and the reft good.-But THE COURT took time to advise.

cular inhabi

369. Rex v. Occupiers of Land in Boroughfen, Trinity, Juftices may 12. Geo. 1. MSS.-An order was made by two juftices charge partion the ftatute 43. Eliz. c. 2. f. 3. to charge fome parti- tants who are cular inhabitants in an extra-parochial place in Boroughfen owners of lands to contribute to a rate for the relief of the poor of the in an extra. parish of St. John the Baptift in Peterborough, which was parochial place not able to provide for its own poor.-MR. SERJEANT within a parish PENGELLY and MR. REEVES moved to quash this order, on the ground that the statute 43. Eliz. c. 2. only autho- of its poor. Comb. 6, 242.. 309. 1. Vent. 2. Bulft. 354. Skin. 258.

2. Seff. Cal. 53.

350.

Lutw. 1566.

to aid another parish in relief

7.

Rex v.

Vent.

350.

Lutw. 156.

rifes the justices to tax any other parish within the fame BOROUGHFIN. hundred with the parish which makes the complaint; but that by the prefent order the rate is charged on particular land owners in Boroughfen, who have no method of reimburfing themfelves, when all the inhabitants of Boroughfen ought to have been taxed; for otherwife the juftices out of private refentment may throw the load of fuch a rate upon particular perfons and free the reft, which would be diftributing unequal juftice. Befides, Boroughfen has a numerous poor of its own, and other perfons in the hundred are at little or no charge from their poor, fo in reafon thefe parifhes fhould have been charged with this rate, as the best able to pay it. They alfo objected, that the order was wrong, because it did not ftate that Boroughfen was a parish, but merely that it was a place fituate and lying within THE HUNDRED aforefaid.-On the other fide it was contended, that the words of this ftatute being that the juftices may "tax, rate, and affefs any other of other parishes," they are thereby impliedly empowered to tax any other perfon; and therefore as the exception taken goes to the validity of the act itself, it is of no confideration. As to the fecond objection, it appears with reafonable certainty, that Boroughfen lies out of the parish of St. John's, becaufe it has a different name-RAYMOND, Chief Justice, FORTESCUE, and REYNOLDS (abfente PoWIS), Juftices, were of opinion, that this was a hard and unreafonable order, fince particular perfons of other parishes would be much expofed to the mercy of the juftices; and that fuch a power was hardly to be trufted with them, for they may rate fome and excufe others altogether as well able to pay. But the words of the ftatute are very ftrong. There are two ways by the 43. Eliz. c. 2. to make one parish contributory to the poor of another, viz. the juftices may either tax particular perfons in aid to the parish which cannot relieve its own poor, or they may affefs a whole parish in a particular fum, and leave it to the churchwardens and overfeers to levy a contribution, which may be in grofs by adjacent parishes yearly.-THE COURT gave judgment on the second objection, that Boroughfen is not faid in the order to be another parish, and for Vide ante, pl. any thing that appears it may be a vill in the fame parish of St. John the Baptift, or no parifh at all. And for this reafon the order was quafhed.

Comb. 242.

306.

IV. Rating parishes within THE COUNTY.

370. Anonymous, Shaw's Juft. 42.-In cafe a parish is An order rating not able to maintain its own poor, two juflices may tax

parishes within

the county must be made at the feffions. Nelfun, 533- Viner, 431.

any

any other parishes within the hundred toward their relief; ANONYMOUS. and if the hundred be not of ability to relieve these parishes, the justices in feffions may tax any other parifli or parishes within the county.

371. Rex v. Percivall, Trinity, 3. Geo. 1. Strange, 56.- It is not necefThe juftices in feffions tax certain parishes in the hun- fary that zwo dred of A. in aid of the parish of B. in the hundred of C. jujeices fhould adjudge the OBJECTION was made, that the ftatute gives no authority hundred inca to the feffions to charge people out of the hundred, till pable to contritwo juftices have enquired whether any parifh in the bute, before the hundred can contribute; the first application to be to twofons can charge a parifa juftices, and the fecond to the feffions.-PARKER, Chief out of the hun Justice. I do not fee to what purpofe it would be for the dred. Juftices to make an order only to adjudge that no parifh Salk. 480. in the hundred is able to contribute; we will prefume the feffions is fatisfied of that: and if two justices fhould make fuch an adjudication, yet the feffions must enquire into the truth of it; and if no order appears which charges any parifh within the hundred, it is a fufficient ground for the feffions to act, If two juftices had charged any parish within the hundred, that would have stopped the feffions from proceeding. The fufficiency of the hundred depends on this, Whether two juftices have ever charged the hundred? If two juftices fhould adjudge the hundred not able, yet if other two juftices adjudge the contrary, their charge would be good, and the feffions be oufted of their jurifdiction, notwithstanding their first determination.-EYRE, Justice. Here are two jurifdic- Salk. 67. 491. tions, that of the juftices and that of the feffions, and they 1. Vent, 174. are both original jurifdictions: they are different in all refpects; for the two juftices have no power out of the hundred, nor the feffions in it.-Order confirmed,

V. Of the diftricts or divifions liable to be assessed.

the relief of an

372. Rex v. Clarendon Park, 16, Viner, 431,-When The inhabitants inhabitants of an extra-parochial place are taxed towards of an extra-pan the relief of the poor of an adjoining parish, the tax must rochial plase be by poll, every particular inhabitant by himfelf; but may be taxed to where it is laid upon a hundred it is otherwife, becaufe adjoiningparifa. there are officers who may proportion what every body 2. Salk. 486, is to pay. But at another day THE COURT held, that 2. Lev. 142. the reafon was, because the parishes were taxable by them- 4. Mod. 157. felves at common law, and that in the faid cafe the inhae. Mod. 251. 2. Mod. 237 bitants of an extra-parachial place may be taxed in general, and that they may proportion the particulars upon every inhabitant; or the tax at first may be laid upon every perfon by himself; but the juftices cannot appoint twa perfons to do this, and that the money fhall be levied on

X ३.

fush

One of the vills

rifh may be or

dered to contribute to the re

was

fuch and fuch; and being thus appointed, the order wa quashed.

373. Anonymous, Hilary, 8. Ann. Foley, 25.—Two jufin the fame pa- tices made an order. The cafe was thus: There were two vills in one parish, and the order recited that one of the vills was very rich, and the other vill very poor, &c. It was objected, that one vil! ought not to contribute to the relief of another vill, becaufe the ftatute mentions parishes only, BY THE COURT. Surely this will come within the equity of the ftatute, though the ftatute only makes mention of parishes.

hief of the other

vill.

Parishes in a city

contributory.

374. Cafe of St. Benedict's, Hilary, 8. Ann. Foley, 43.not to be made An order was made by two juftices to affefs the parithes of St. Stephen and St. Magdalen, in Norwich, in aid of the parish of St. Benedict, which was not able to maintain its own poor. Objection was now made, that thefe parishes are not within the fame hundred; they are in Norwich, where there is no hundred, and therefore the juftices have no jurifdiction by the 43. Eliz. c. 2. f. 3.-PER HOLT, Chief Justice. The order must be quafhed.

Extra-parochial place.

Any divifion equivalent or

bundred is within the ftatute.

Paley, 3d edit.

375. Rexv. Boroughfen, Eafler, 10. Geo. 1. Foley, 37.An order was made by two juftices to make a place chargeable to the poor of another parish. FIRST OBJECTION, That this was an extra-parochial place.-Sed non allocatur: the act mentioned any place. SECOND OBJECTION, There was a diftrefs warrant granted at the fame time the order was made.-PER CURIAM. Order must be confirmed.

376. Rex v. Milland, Eafter, 31. Geo. 2. Burr. 576.Two juftices make an order for taking the tithing of Milfynonymous to land in aid of the parish of St. Peter's, in the fame county; which was confirmed at the feffions, who ftate upon their order, that the tithing of Milland lies in the fame liberty of the foke with the faid parish of St. Peter. It was objected, that it does not appear that the places are in the 16: Viner, 416 fame hundred (as required by the 43. Eliz. c. 2.; that 11. Mod. 268., liberty" and joke" are vague terms, and not equivalent to the known legal term "hundred;" but ye: haps the liberty may extend into feveral hundreds.-But THE COURT did not confider themfelves as bound down by the particular word “hundred” used in the act; but that if any divifion be called by any name fynonymous or equivalent to that of hundred, it must be equally within the intention of the act. But having fent the matter back to the feffions to be more particularly ftated, and upon the return it appearing to be substantially an hundred, the Cour: affirmed both orders.

CHAP