An Abridgment of Cases Upon Poor Law; From 5 & 6 Vict. to 20 & 21 Vict. (1842 to 1858), in Continuation of Mr. Lumley's Poor Law Cases Volume 3

An Abridgment of Cases Upon Poor Law; From 5 & 6 Vict. to 20 & 21 Vict. (1842 to 1858), in Continuation of Mr. Lumley's Poor Law Cases Volume 3

By (author) 

List price: US$25.52

Currently unavailable

Add to wishlist

AbeBooks may have this title (opens in new window).

Try AbeBooks

Description

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1858 edition. Excerpt: ...not grant a Mandamus to them to erase the latter Words. Upon an appeal against an order of removal, the respondents proved a former order unappealed against; it was a suspended order, but the respondents failed in proving that the suspension had been taken ofi', and also that the paupers had been removed under it. The sessions quashed the order, making a special entry that they quashed it, but not upon the merits. An application was then made to Patteson, J., in the Bail Court, for a mandamus to the sessions commanding them to erase the words, but not upon the merits, or to rehear the case. But Pntteson, J1, refused it; he admitted that the objection went to the merits, and that the decision was upon the merits, but he said that the Court could not interfere, as the sessions had jurisdiction to do what-they did; and as to ordering them to rehear the case, that the Court had no authority to do it, as they had already heard and determined it. The Special Entry, on quashing an Order, cannot be questioned in a subsequent Appeal. Upon an appeal against an order for the removal of George Wood from St. Pancras to St. Ann s, Westminster, the sessions confirmed the order, subject to a case. A former similar order was appealed against, and the sessions quashed it, not upon the merits, and without prejudice to the making of any other order for the removal of the pauper. In the present case, the appellants contended that the objection for which the former order was quashed, affected the merits of the settlement, and that the Court could not now proceed to try the matter over again; but the sessions held that they were bound by the entry of the former decision, and could not inquire into the proceedings of the former Court;...show more

Product details

  • Paperback | 168 pages
  • 189 x 246 x 9mm | 313g
  • Rarebooksclub.com
  • Miami Fl, United States
  • English
  • black & white illustrations
  • 1236603389
  • 9781236603388