Inhabitants of Southbridge v. Inhabitants of Charlton
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Assumpsit for the supplies furnished to two paupers, one named Jonathan Weld, about sixty years of age, the other a boy, seven or eight years old, named Edwin Clemence.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit for the supplies furnished to two paupers, one named Jonathan Weld, about sixty years of age, the other a boy, seven or eight years old, named Edwin Clemence. At the trial, which was had upon the general issue, before the Chief Justice, at the last April term in this county, the following facts were agreed by the parties, viz.: The settlement of Jonathan Weld was derivative from his father, who acquired his settlement by owning and occupying real estate in that part of the territory, originally Charlton, which still remains a part of that town. The settlement of Edwin Clemence was…
1Opinion of the CourtParker, C. J.
The paupers, having had their legal settlement in the town of Charlton, must retain it, unless, by virtue of the act incorporating Southbridge, they gained a settlement within that town.
We think it very clear that the act of incorporation did not affect their settlement. They were then paupers: not having removed within the limits of the newly incorporated town by iheir own volition, but having been placed there, by the overseers of Charlton, for the convenience of that town, their municipal relation remained unaffected by the removal; nor were they inhabitants of that part of Charlton which…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Adams v. BicknellIndiana Supreme Court · 1890
- Town of Freeport v. Board of SupervisorsIllinois Supreme Court · 1866
- Inhabitants of Great Barrington v. Inhabitants of LancasterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1817
- Barnstead v. StraffordSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1835
- Inhabitants of Fitchburg v. Inhabitants of WestminsterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1822
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.