« PreviousContinue »
sis months, when she left her mistress. She was removed by the order of two justices from Thames Ditton to Chelsea, as having served the last 40 days in that parish, and the sessions ou appeal quashed that order. Against the order of sessions and in support of the order of removal, it was contended, that although the term ased in the statute was hiring, and the con. tract in this case was a purchase, yet the meaning was in sub. stance the same, and that if this pauper had gained io settle. ment, it would follow that all negroes could be maintained on. ly as casual poor, and in that character they certainly would not be so well taken care of.-By lord Mansfield. This case does not admit of an argument. The Poor Law is a system of many acts of parliament. To give this pauper a settlement, she must come within the description of a positive law. Hier being black or a slave is no objection, but the statutes re. çuire a hiring ; there is none here ; and therefore the case is not within the statute.-Order of sessions confirmed. 2 Boll, Conil's ed. 330. Caldecot's Cases, 516.
The residing with a relation upon an invitation to come and live with him, and performing the work of a servant with such relation for several years, is not sufficient to gain a settlement, the service not being under a:y hiring. This was decided in the case of the K. v. the Inhabitants of Stokesly, Tr. Ter. 36 Geo. 3, which was as follows. An order for the removal of a pauper and his family, from Wylan to Stokesly, was on appa! confirmed by the sessions, subject to the opinion of the court on the following case: the pauper, who was illegitimate, was born at Little Wittinglon; and after his mother's death, which happened when he was about six years old, he went to Sirenith her brother at Mordon, as a relation, and not under om hiring ; his said uncle farmed about 401. a year, and set tim to drive his plough, the first or second day after he weat to Mordon: and he continued working at the farm for the spue of about eight years, but received no wages or any other Terard during that time, except meat and clothes; and he and his said uncle wrought all the work of the farin during the last three or four years of that period. The pauper having some Fonts with his uncle, shortly before May Day went to Darlington hiring, and there hired himself to a person of Aircy Holm, to be a servant in husbandry for one year ; and he sorted the same at Arcy lolm aforesaid accordingly. Short. ly before the expiration of service at Aircy Holm, he receive ed a letter from his unclo requesting his return to Mordun, and saying, that if he would come and live with him as before, le (his uncle) could surely make it as good, or better for him than a common service. During the year the pauper served at direy Ilolm, his uncle had no regular hired servant, but einployed an elderly man as a labourer, tu lead his lime and manure, thrash his cord, and do such other work about his farm, as he did not like to do himself; and which the pauper used regular. ly, year after year, as he grew in streagth, to du for him.
Agreeably to his uncle's request, he returned to him at ordon as soon as he left his service at Aircy lIolin, and lived with him there about three years, at the expiration of which he went with his uncle to Stokesly, and lived with him there about four years and a half ; during all which time he performed the greatest part of the work of the farm, as his uncle at that time kept no other servant, and was himself an elderly and infirm man. When the pauper returned home from Aircy Holm to Nordon, he made no agreement with his uncle, cither for what time or for what consideration he should serve him ; but his uncle often promised him, if he would stay with hiin for his life, he would leave him his stock and crop, and farm, as his own, his uncle's son having got a good place, and being otherwise well provided for; and his uncle of course found him mcat and clothes, and used to give him a few shillings when he went to market, or from home, but nothing more. The pauper left his uncle about the Nartinmas time, or a little after, and believed him seif at liberty to leave him at any time. Immediately after. wards he married, and has not gained any settlement since At the time the pauper and his uncle parted, they had no reck. oning, and did not part friends. In support of the order, i was argued that “ the pauper having performed all the office "6 of á servant for so long a time, though without wages 66 the court would be warranted in raising the implication of
general hiring." --But by lord Kenyon, Ch. J. ment might have had a good effect, if addressed to the court o quarter sessions ; but it cannot have any weight here, be cause the facts stated in the case negative any hiring ; indee that argument applies as well to the first as to the secon service; and the justices have expressly said that there wa no hiring during the first service ; they also state that befor the pauper returned to his uncle, the latter proposed to him come and live with him as before, that is, in the same relatio This excludes the idea of any hiring for a year. I don wish to break in upon those cases where it has been de termined that a general hiring is a hiring for a year, that a hiring under certain circumstances may be presumed and if the justices had in this case found that there w a yearly hiring, it would have concluded the case. B here they have expressly found that “ the first service was no 66 under any hiring,” and that the second was as before and we
cannot contradict these facts, and introduce ai own conjectures on the subject, in opposition to this finding. By the Court, order of sessions quashed. 6 Term Rep. 75
So in the K. v. St. Mary, Guilford, Ea. 25 Geo, 3, whe a boy at the age of 11 went to live with his uncle, a taylor South Mins, and continued to live with him, working in a Icarning his business till about the age of seventeen, being pr vided with board, lodging, and necessaries--THE COURT S a hiring was certainly necessary, and that this was clearly settlement in South Mins. 2 Bolt, Const's ed. 332. Cal cot's Cases, 521.
This argu So in the k. ». St. Matthiesa, Ipszeich, Mich. 30 Geo. 3. About five years ago, the waiter b:longing to an ion in St. Matthew, being ill, sent for the purper to assist himn at the inn, were he staid as helper to the waiter about six months and then went axar. The waiter being again taken ill, sent for the pauper to help him, which he did ; and he continued • in the io as boot.catcher for nineteen mooths, during which * tiae he lodged and boarded there,' and was to be satisfied by the gentlemen who came to the house. The inaster of the
inn kne# of his being there the night after he came',' but no. thing (assed between him and the pauper at the time. The waiter who sent for the pauper continued in the service of the master of the inn till about July in the next year, when he wept away, and the pauper continued there till the Christmas following; when the master of the ion and the pauper har. ing so:ne di-pate, the former told him to go away, upon which he asked the master to give him something for the time he had been there. He the master replied he should not, as he made no agreement with him : bat on being pressed again to consider bis situation, he not having any thing to help himself, he gave bin two gaineas and sent him away: the pauper then left the house. The pauper considered himself not as a servant to the master, but as assistant to the waiter, and thought himself at liberty to go away when he pleased ; he saw the master sometimes, who, if a guest wanted his boots, told the pauper to get them, and at other times sent him on errands.--It was contended, that the pauper gained a settlement in St. Mat. ther's by serving nineteen months under an hiring with the master of the jon: for though there was no personal comDedication between them, yet that the waiter might be tênsidered as the agent of his master in this respect, and that then sufficient appeared to shew, that there was a genefél kiring, under which the pauper might gain a settlement. That the circumstarice of the master's knowing that the pauper was in his service on the second day, amounted to a confirmation of the act of his ageat; and the wages are not necessary to con. fet a settlement : that even if it were doubtful whether the pozuper was to be considered at first merely as ao assistant to the waiter, yet for the last six months he must necessarily have been the servant of the master (the waiter being then gone); and as be continued ju the same service after the waiter went as before, without making any new agreement, the latter service was a strong presumption of a general hiring from the beginning.-By lord Kenyon Ch.J. I agree that there is no neces. sity for an hiring by the master himself: that if there be an biring, it shall be presumed to be an hiring for a year, unless sonething appear to show that the contrary was intended : and that wages are not necessary to confer a settlement on the SETTOt. But the foundation of the argument here is, that the pauper was the servant of the master of the inn; now that is expressly negatived by the facts of the case. For it is stated
that the waiter being ill sent for the pauper, who went helper to the wailer; and, after staying there six months, wer away: and that the waiter being afterwards taken ill agail sent for the paper, who went a second time to perform th business for the waiter : here therefore the question arises upo the determination of which this case must turn : lu whats tuation was the pauper at that time? The case states, thath came there as helper to the waiter ; and there is nothing i the case from whence we can infer that he was the servant the master of the inn. Therefore down to the time when th waiter went away, it is impossible to say that there was any agre ment between the inn-keeper and the pauper. It is true, thi we cannot refer the last six months of the pauper's service any thing but a contract with the innkeeper ; but that is ne • sufficient to give a settlement.' If, indeed, the pauper had bet before in the inn-keeper's service, and had then lived unde • a yearly hiring,' making in the whole a year's service, thi would have gained hina a settlement; but here was no co
tract with the inn-keeper either express or implied until th
last six months.' In cases where the nature of the servi implies an hiring, the court will raise such implication; bu the nature of the service here implies the reverse, Small cit cumstances have indecd been held sufficient to raise a contract as where the master told the pauper to go "into Ned Itill place," it appearing that Ned Hill had lived there as a year servant; but it is to be observed, that in that case there w some conversation between the master and the servant respectir the contract; but here there was none. 3 Term Rep. 419.
But if there be a hiring, although it be general, yet that sufficient ; for it shall be deemed to be a hiring for a yea Thus in Ilandsworth y. Putney, En. 13 Geo. 2, a boy came to li with a genileman without any hiring, and in about six weeks two mouths after his first coming, his master told him that if staid it year, and behaved himself well, the next year he wou give him a full livery and wages ; he lived there a year and fo months afterwards, and received one guinea and an half wag The court inclined to think that this was a conditional hirin and that the hoy's service was an asscnt in fact, and that gained a settlement, but referred the matter back to the se sions to be more fully stated *. 2 Sess. Cas. 188. .
So in the K. v. Wincanton, Hil. 24 Geo, 2, the pauper L ing settled at ll'incanton at the age of 17, went to one II lians of Charleton Horethorne, and offered to serve hi Williams liking him, hired him to serve him in husbandry, a agreed to give him meat, drink, washing, and lodging, a clothes when wanted; but no particular time was agreed o and the pauper apprebended his master might turn him a or he might have gone away from him, at their pleasure ; per theless, there was no agreement for that purposes that the opion the pauper continued with and served Williams in Char • This care is very fully reported in 2 Bott, Conse's
ed. p. 335.
General bir 21,5.
ter Horethorne aforesaid for two years and a half. By Lee, Ch. J. and the Court. It is agreed that “a general hiring is a ! hiring for a year :' therefore the only question is, Whether the circumstances of this case shew an intention to the contrary? The apprehension of the pauper is stated indeed to have been to the contrary ; but it is also stated, that there was no agreco ment for that purpose. His lordship said, he did not see any circunstances to vary it from the general rule, which has been and must be agreed. Burrows's Selt. Cus. 674.
So in the K. v. Berwick St. John, Ea. 33 Geo. 2, the pauper being settled at llanley, happening to meet the head. keeper of Rushmore Lodge in Berwick St. John, and who had theo lately parted with a person who had been for many years one of his servants or under keepers at the wages of 3l. a year, and a keeper's livery besides meat, drink, and lodging; the said head keeper addressed the pauper in these words, “ Do fou like the life of a keeper?” which being answered in the alFirmative, he said further, “ Then go into Ned ffill's place; " and you shall want nn encouragement:” The pairper, without further conversation, went immediately into the said serrice, and continued therein three years, during which time he was furnished with a keeper's livery; and with meat, drinki, and budging, and at the end was paid gl. for his service...-By lord Mansfield, and the court. This man served three years, and received three years wagus ; but it is ohjected that he was bere hired at all. It is admitted, that if he was hired at all, it would by law be a hiring for a year. And upon this dialogue, stated in the order of sessions, it is a clear hiring; for Flill vis a bired sersagt. Burrow's Sett. Cas. 502.
So in the K. v. Stockbridge, Mich. 14 Geo. 3, the pauper being settled at Stockbridge, was hired to one Nicholas of the parisk of Wanston, to serve him as a boot-catcher, and occasiuhally as a post chaise driver, no term for which he was to lerre being nentioned; he accordingly went into the service, and continued in it for one year; and was during that time, toond by his master in meat, drink, and lodging there, but re. Gived so wages for such service. At the end of the year the pauper quitted Nicholas, and was afterwards sent for by oue latte an inpkeeper of Basingstoke, who wanted a driver. The pauper saying he should be glad to serve him, was ordered by Watts to take care of his horses, and not to drive them too hard, but no teras were mentioned. The pauper served him as a pastillion for a year in Busingstoke ; being found by him in meat, drink, and lodging there ; but received no wages: the pauper thought he was at liberty to leave either of the said masters whenever he pleased, and it was proved by several witnesses, that the customary baner of engaging postillions is as above, and that the masters and postillions think themselves at liberty to part whenever they please. --BY THE COURT. A general indefinite hiring is a hiring for a year,upless something appears that may raise a presumption to the contrary. Now, hereis enough stated to shew a generalinde.