399. Rex. v. Stanley, Eafler Term, 22, Geo. 3. Cald. 172. The juftices Two juftices of the Weft Riding of the county of 1ork, baftard to have must adjudge a by an order dated the 29th of May 1781, adjudge Thomas been born in the Stanley of Workfop, in the county of Nottingham, to be parish to be the reputed father of a baftard child begotten upon Ann charged by their Storey of Anton, in the faid West Riding; " which faid order. "child is now become chargeable, &c. and is likely so "to continue;" and then proceed to order maintenance, &c.—WALLACE infifted, that there was no adjudication that the child was born in the parish charged with its maintenance, nothing more being ftated than that it was chargeable to the parish, and likely fo to continue: and the order was quafhed.

IX. Of the appeal.

must be to the divifion wherein the order was

600. Rex v. Coyfton, Trinity, 15. Car. 2. 1. Sid. 149. The appeal It was refolved, that the words "next general feffions" in the 18. Eliz. c. 3. muft be intended, that the order made by two juftices must be confirmed or difcharged at the made. next general feffions for that part of the county where it was made, and not at the feffions in the county; for it would be mischievous in many counties, where there are feveral feffions in diftin&t parts of the county.

after notice to

the father.

601. Rex v. Brown, Trinity Term, 9. William 3. 2. Salk. An appeal from 480.-An order was made, adjudging Brown to be the an order of basfather of a baftard child, May 2, 1696, and in the Mi- tardy must be to chaelmas feffions following the faid order was difcharged. the first flops/ Now both orders being here, the latter was quafhed, benot caufe it did appear thereupon, that Michaelmas feffions Comb. 448. was the firft feffions after notice given to the reputed father of his being fo adjudged; for though 18. Eliz. c. 3. appoints the appeal not to be to the first feffions after the order of the two juftices, but the first feffions after the party hath notice of the faid order, yet by the ftatute of 2. Hen. 5. c. 4. there might be a feffions intervening, as in this cafe, between the order by the two juftices and the order of feffions; and it muft appear on the order that this was the first feffions after notice had of the former order: after which the first order by the two juftices was quathed, because there was an adjudication therein, that the reputed father fhould pay a certain fum weekly till the child be of feven years of age; whereas they cannot charge the father for any certain determinate time, but as long as the child fhall be chargeable to the parish.

neral feffions after notice.

Appeal must be 602. Rex v. Shaw, Trinity, 10. Vill. 3. 2. Sulk. 482. to the next ge--An order was made by two juftices adjudging Shaw the reputed father of a baftard; from which he appealed to the next quarter feffions of the peace after notice, where the order was difcharged. The order of feffions was quafhed, because by the ftatute 18. Eliz. the appeal must be to the next general feffions after notice, and there might have been a general feflions before the general quarter feffions, as in London and Middlefex, where there are four general feffions in a year befides the four general quarter feffions (a).

(a) Vide poft.

page 447, LORD KENYON'S obfervation on this cafe.

After 24 June

1732, juftices

may rectify de

fects of form

appeals,

and may pro. ceed to determine them.

on

603. By 5. Geo. 2. c. 19. Upon all appeals to be nade to the juftices of the peace at their refpective ge"neral or quarter feffions to be holden for any county, riding, city, liberty, or precinct, within that part of "Great Britain called England, against judgments or or"ders given or made by any juftices of the peace as afore

faid, fuch juftices fo affembled at any general or quarter "feffions fhall, and they are hereby required, from time "to time, within their refpective jurifdictions, upon all "and every fuch appeals fo made to them, to caufe any "defect or defects of form that shall be found in any "fuch original judgments or orders to be rectified and "amended without any coft or charges to the parties "concerned, and after fuch amendment made fhall pro«ceed to hear, examine, and confider the truth and me"rits of all matters concerning fuch original judgments or orders; and likewife to examine all witneffes upon "oath, and hear all other proofs relating thereto, and "to make fuch determinations thereupon as by law they "fhould or ought to have done in cafe there had not "been fuch defect or want of form in the original proceeding, any law, ufage, or cuftom to the contrary not withstanding."

After the fif 604. Slater's Cafe, Eafter Term, 19, Car. 1, Cro. Car. 47 1 fions have made -FIRST, It was refolved by the whole Court, that bean order, wo fore the ftatute 3. Car. 1. c. 4. the feflions had not aujuftices cannot. thority te, meddle in the cafe of baftardy till the two next

juftices, according to the ftatute 18, Eliz. c. 3. had made an order therein, and that then, and not before, the juf tices in feffions, might make a new order, &c. otherwife not. SECONDLY, That by the 3. Car. c. 4. the feffions original autho have authority originally to make an order in the cafe of baftardy; and therefore the first order made by the fef

Seffions have

rity.

SLATER'S

CASE

fions in this cafe was good and legal, and the order made by the two next juftices void, and could not alter or revoke the order (of feflions) which was firft made by good authority. THIRDLY, That the juftices had not Juftices cannot authority to commit the 'woman to prifon for life for commuit. the firft offence.

fions to a fub

605. Pridgeon's Cafe, Bulftrode, 255.-An order was made No appeal lies upon Pridgeon by two juftices of peace, directing him to from an order make a weekly allowance for maintaining a baftard child made on appeal of which they adjudged him the reputed father; which at quarter ferorder was quafhed at the feffions, and another was made fequent feflions. there upon 7. S. adjudging him to be the reputed father, &c.: afterwards, at another feffions, the laft order was discharged, and by the fame order of fethions Pridgeon was found again to be the reputed father of the baftard child, and ordered to make an allowance for its maintenance. Thefe orders being removed by certiorari into the king's bench, it was refolved by the whole Court, that the fecond order made upon Pridgeon at the quarter feffions was clearly illegal; that no appeal lay from the firft order of the feffions to the feffions afterwards, but that the first order of feflions was final.

order of baf

reputed father,

606. Wood's Cafe, Trinity Term, 13, Car. 1. 2. Bul- The feffions ftrade, 355-On complaint to the feffions against a may quafh an woman having a baftard child, the matter was by them tardy made by referred according to law to the two next juftices to have two juices, and the examination and ordering thereof. The faid two juf- make an original tices made an order against John Wood to be the reputed order on another father, and ordered him to pay a weekly fum towards perfon as the the maintenance of the faid child. Wood appealed to againft which the feffions; and the juftices there, on a re-examina- original order tion of the matter, difallowed of the order made by the there is no aptwo juftices, and they there made a new order, by which peal. they charged one William Cole to be the reputed father, On a reference of the matter to SIR WILLIAM JONES, judge of affize, and both the orders being read in court that is, the order made by the two next juftices, and the fubfequent order made at the feffions, he would not enter into the re-examination of this caufe, but did, in omnibus, affirm the laft order made by the feffions upon appeal to them from the first order; which laft order made at the feffions was final, and no appeal to be admitted against it and this, he faid, had been adjudged divers times, and mentioned particularly Pridgeon's cafe.

607. Rex

f

Note the differ

ence between the 18. Eliz.

3. and 3.Car.

C. 4.

The feffions

cannot fine a conitable for

607. Reg. v. Wefton, Trinity, 4. Ann. 1. Salk. 122.The feffions, with regard to the fathers of baftards, must proceed upon the recognizance on the 18th Eliz. c. 3. ; but if they proceed on the 3. Car. 1. c 4. they may commit as the two juftices might have done, that is, unless the party put in fecurity to perform the order, or to appear at the next feffions.

608. Reg. v. Ridge, Mich. Term, 11. Ann. MSS.A. fwore that B. got her with child, and a warrant was granted to the defendant Ridge, then being constable, to putative father apprehend B. and he let him efcape. The juftices

fuffering the

to escape.

In an original order of baf

Tardy made at feffions, it ought

to appear that the reputed

fore, unless the contrary thal! appear, the Court will prefame that he

although not fo ftated in the

order,

made an order upon Ridge to pay three pounds towards the expences the parish has been at, and one fhilling a-week towards the maintenance of the child, and the mother to pay fixpence a week.-Quafhed as to the conftable, the justices not having fuch authority; but confirmed as to the mother.

609. Rex v. Clegg, Mich. Term, 8. Geo. 1. Stra. 475An order of baflardy was made at feilions (which was admitted to have original jurifdiction). MR. DENTON objected, that it was not faid the defendant was ever fummoned or appeared, and natural justice required that he father was fum- fhould at leaft have an opportunity to defend himself.→ moned; there- PRATT, Chief fuftice. I believe thefe orders made originally at feffions are very rare, the ufual way being to bring the matter before the fellions by way of appeal fronr the order of two juftices. Now if it should be taken, that the order of two juftices will be well enough, without their was fummoned, Thewing a fuminons or appearance; yet I think this cafe will fall under a very different confideration. For in the other cafe the party has an opportunity to relieve himfelf by appeal, whereas upon an original order at feffions he can have no opportunity to bring the matter to a farther examination; fo that it is but a lewd woman's going behind his back and fwearing a baftard upon him, by which means the most innocent man in the world may (a) 10 Mod. demned. In the cafe of the Queen v. Simpson (a), it was long 248. 341, 378. debated, whether there ought not to have been a perfonal 1. Sef. Caf. 346. appearance of the deer-ftealer; at laft indeed it was deGilb. 282. termined, that a fummons was fufficient, but it was never offered to be fupported upon the foot of not fhewing a fummons. So far from it, that exceptions were taken to the manner of the fummons, and the Court delivered a fpecial opinion as to them.-EYRE,Justice (abfente Powis). Ld. Ray. 14c6. It not appearing that this order was made in the abfence of the party, I think we must take it to be a regu

Stra. 44.

be

con

Lar

lar proceeding. And fo it was held in the cafe of the REX. CLEGG. King v. Peckham, Carih. 406 (a). The Court faid, Where a (a)S.C.5 Mod. fummons was neceflary, they would prefume there was 321. one, unless the contrary appeared; for all jurifdictions S. C. Comb. are prefumed primâ facie to act according to law.-FOR- 439TESCUE, Juftice. It is certain, that natural juftice requires, that no man fhall be condemned without notice; for which reafon I think the order will be good, because it does not appear to us that he had no notice: are we to fuppofe the feffions have proceeded contrary to right and juftice, and that too in a cafe where they have undoubted jurifdiction? In the cafe of fervants wages the jurifdiction is given only in hufbandry, and yet orders have been held good, where it did not appear the fervice was in husbandry; for the Court faid, they would intend it fo, unlefs the contrary appeared.-PRATT, Chief Juftice. I do Salk. 442not fee to what purpose we exercife a fuperintendency over all inferior jurifdictions, unless it be to inspect their proceedings, and fee whether they are regular or not. I have often heard it faid, that nothing thall be prefumed one way or the other in an inferior jurifdiction. And as to the cafe of wages, it was always wondered at, and in my LORD PARKER's time it was actually contradicted in the cafe of the King v. Helling (b).-Adjournatur. Trin. (b) Strange, 8. 12. Geo. it was moved and confirmed without oppofition.

was made on

S. C. Stra. 716.
S. C. Ld. Ray.

1423.

610. Rex v. Teriam, Mich. 13. Geo. 1. MSS.-LEE moved Order of feffions to quafh an order of baftardy by two juftices to charge recites that it the defendant with keeping a baftard begotten on a feme full hearing, the covert in the hufband's abfence, on the evidence of a cer- merits therefore tificate from a captain in the army that the husband was must have come at that time in Ireland, and the concurring evidence of before them, the woman's confeffion that defendant was the father. and their dif charge is conThe cafe was thus: The defendant appealed from the clufive. order of two juftices to the feflions, who quafhed the first order. The fame two juftices made a fecond order on the grounds of the firft, and it was infifted the order was void; for according to the cafe in 1. l'ent. 89. if an or- s. C. 1. Sef. Caf. der of two juftices be revoked by appeal at feffions, the 272. perfon is abfolutely discharged, and the juftices have no power to make a new order. It was anfwered, that if feffions difcharge the order for form, a new order might be nade.-SED PER CURIAM. Nothing of that kind shall be intended. The order of feflions recites that this order was made on full hearing, and therefore the merits must have come before them, and the difcharge by the feffions on the appeal is conclufive: and the defendant being in court was difcharged.

611. Rex