Town of Bristol v. Town of Braintree
Supreme Court of Vermont
Appeal from an order of removal of a pauper. It appeared from the copies of the appeal, that Luman Case, overseer of the poor of Bristol, filed his complaint before two justices, agreeably to the statute, setting forth that one William Amidon, late of Braintree, in the county of Orange, had come to reside in said Bristol, and had not gained a legal settlement in said Bristol, and had become chargeable, for his support, to said town of Bristol, and prayed that said Amidon…
Read the full summary
Appeal from an order of removal of a pauper. It appeared from the copies of the appeal, that Luman Case, overseer of the poor of Bristol, filed his complaint before two justices, agreeably to the statute, setting forth that one William Amidon, late of Braintree, in the county of Orange, had come to reside in said Bristol, and had not gained a legal settlement in said Bristol, and had become chargeable, for his support, to said town of Bristol, and prayed that said Amidon might be examined, &c. Whereupon a warrant issued in due form of law, directed to either constable of said Bristol, to…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Williams, Ch. J.
The case comes before us on exceptions to the judgment of the county court, overruling a motion to quash the proceedings.
*206The first exception to the proceedings of the magistrates is, that the constable, who served the process issuing from the magistrate, was the person who made the complaint. It appears that Mr. Case was overseer of the poor of the town of Bristol, as well as constable of the town.
The proceedings to be had before magistrates, for the removal of paupers, are pointed out by statute. The complaint must be made by the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Town of Landgrove v. Town of PawletSupreme Court of Vermont · 1848
- Town of Landgrove v. Town of PlymouthSupreme Court of Vermont · 1879