Overseers of the Poor of Bradford v. Overseers of the Poor of Corinth
Supreme Court of Vermont
THIS was a motion by the appellees, for anew trial, predicated upon the exception taken on the trial, which appears in the following case, as allowed by the Court. Supreme Court, Orange county, August T. 1825. This is an appeal from an order of removal of Daniel McConnel from Corinth to Bradford. The cause came on to be tried at this term of said court, and was committed to a jury, on the issue of unduly removed.
Read the full summary
THIS was a motion by the appellees, for anew trial, predicated upon the exception taken on the trial, which appears in the following case, as allowed by the Court. Supreme Court, Orange county, August T. 1825. This is an appeal from an order of removal of Daniel McConnel from Corinth to Bradford. The cause came on to be tried at this term of said court, and was committed to a jury, on the issue of unduly removed. On the trial, the appellees proved a residence of the pauper in the town of Bradford more than one full year before 1817; also produced the record of the order of removal,- and the…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Skinner, Ch. J.
The 5th section of the statute of 1817, for the support of the poor, &c. requires that an attested copy of the order of removal shall be left with some one of the overseers of the poor of the town to which the pauper shall be ordered to remove, within thirty days after the making such order.
Although there is no other obligation upon any town to support that class of citizens called paupers, than what arises from positive statute, and consequently a strict and literal compliance-with its requisitions is necessary; yet it has been…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Town of Dorset v. Town of RutlandSupreme Court of Vermont · 1844