Town of Woodstock v. Hooker
Supreme Court of Connecticut
This was an action on the statute prohibiting the bringing into and leaving in this state of poor persons, not being inhabitants of the town in which they are left, (p. 282. tit. 51. s. 10.) to recover the penalty given by that statute.
Read the full summary
This was an action on the statute prohibiting the bringing into and leaving in this state of poor persons, not being inhabitants of the town in which they are left, (p. 282. tit. 51. s. 10.) to recover the penalty given by that statute. The declaration stated, that the defendant, on the 10th of October, 1822, brought into this state Lotsena, Therat, Barna and Horace Smith, all poor and indigent persons, and left them in the town of Woodstock, they not being inhabitants of that town. The cause was tried at Brooklyn, January term, 1825, before Brainard, J. The paupers mentioned in the…
1Opinion of the CourtPeters, J.
The question is, whether the paupers are settled in Southbridge, where they were born, or in Woodstock, where their mother was then settled. By the common law, a bastard is nullius filius, and derives nothing from his parents ; for he has no parents ; and is settled where born. 1 Bla. Comm. 485. But it has been discovered in this state, that a bastard is the child of his mother, and capable of inheriting estate, and deriving a settlement from her. Brown v. Dye, 2 Root 280. Heath v. White, 5 Conn. Rep. 228. Canaan v. Salisbury, 1 Root 155. By the statute of Massachusetts, passed in 1793, chap.…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Heath v. WhiteSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1824
- Town of Hebron v. Town of MarlboroughSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1816
- Town of Canaan v. Town of SalisburyConnecticut Superior Court · 1790
3Cited by4 opinions
- DickinsonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1875
- Eaton v. EatonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1914
- People v. CalderMichigan Supreme Court · 1874
- Town of New-Haven v. Town of NewtownSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1837