Overseers of the Poor of Canajoharie v. Overseers of the Poor of Johnstown

New York Supreme Court

Overseers of the Poor of Canajoharie v. Overseers of the Poor of Johnstown

17 Johns. 41

CourtNew York Supreme Court

DecidedAugust 15, 1819

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 17 Johns. 41 (Overseers of the Poor of Canajoharie v. Overseers of the Poor of Johnstown) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Overseers of the Poor of Canajoharie v. Overseers of the Poor of Johnstown, 17 Johns. 41 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1819).

Pincite

Opinion

Spexcer, Ch. J.

That was a question merely as to an order of maintenance, submitted to the court without argument, and was correctly decided: the case did not require, or call for the observations which were evidently made without reference to the act for the settlement of the poor. The mistake, however, could not mislead.

Per Curiam. The town of Canajoharie was the place of the last legal settlement of the pauper’s mother. The pauper was an illegitimate child. At common law, a bastard child was settled where it was born ; but our statute (1 N. R. L. 280. sess. 36. ch. 78. sec. 3.) has altered the common law, and declares, “ that every bastard child shall be deemed and adjudged to be settled in the city or town of the last legal settlement of the mother.” It is, however, urged, that the statute contemplates a settlement acquired by the mother ; and not one that is derivative, or in consequence of the acquisition of a new settlement through the father of #the pauper’s mother, as in this case. We are not at liberty to proceed on such an ingenious distinction: the language of the statute is clear and precise ; that the last legal settlement of the mother, however acquired, is that of her illegitimate child. The very expression, last legal settlement, supposes that the settlement of the mother might be changed.

Order of the Sessions affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Spexcer, Ch. J.

That was a question merely as to an order of maintenance, submitted to the court without argument, and was correctly decided: the case did not require, or call for the observations which were evidently made without reference to the act for the settlement of the poor. The mistake, however, could not mislead.

Per Curiam. The town of Canajoharie was the place of the last legal settlement of the pauper’s mother. The pauper was an illegitimate child. At common law, a bastard child was settled where it was born ; but our statute (1 N. R. L. 280. sess. 36. ch. 78. sec. 3.) has altered the common law, and declares, “ that every bastard child shall be deemed and adjudged to be settled in the city or town of the last legal settlement of the mother.” It is, however, urged, that the statute contemplates a settlement acquired by the mother ; and not one that is derivative, or in consequence of the acquisition of a new settlement through the father of #the pauper’s mother, as in this case. We are not at liberty to proceed on such an ingenious distinction: the language of the statute is clear and precise ; that the last legal settlement of the mother, however acquired, is that of her illegitimate child. The very expression, last legal settlement, supposes that the settlement of the mother might be changed.

Order of the Sessions affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

17 Johns. 41, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/overseers-of-the-poor-of-canajoharie-v-overseers-of-the-poor-of-johnstown-nysupct-1819.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack