Inhabitants of Newburyport v. Inhabitants of Boothbay
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Assumpsit for the support of Samuel Reed, a pauper, with averments that his legal settlement was in Boothbay ; that the overseers of the poor there were notified, &c.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit for the support of Samuel Reed, a pauper, with averments that his legal settlement was in Boothbay ; that the overseers of the poor there were notified, &c. At the trial of the action, which was had upon the general issue, at the sittings here after the last November term, before Sewall, J., the pauper was proved to be the son of John Reed by his wife Mary, since Mary Knowlton, her deposition being admitted in evidence, and her marriage with John Reed being fully proved by the certificate of the town clerk, &c. The marriage was in 1784, * after which the said John and Mary went to…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
The jury might lawfully infer a legal marriage from the evidence at the trial; a long-continued cohabitation is, in fact, one usual evidence of a marriage, (a)
Judgment on the verdict
[Rex vs. Stockland, Bur. Sett. c. 508 — Leader vs. Barry, 1 Esp. N. P R. 353 — Ed.]
2Cited by10 opinions
- O'Gara v. . EisenlohrNew York Court of Appeals · 1868
- Adger v. AckermanCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1902
- Thomas v. BradySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1848
- State v. KeanSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1839
- Inhabitants of Camden v. Inhabitants of BelgradeSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1883
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.