Town of Tamworth v. Town of New-Market

3 N.H. 472
CourtSuperior Court of New Hampshire
DecidedSeptember 15, 1826
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 3 N.H. 472 (Town of Tamworth v. Town of New-Market) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of New Hampshire primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Town of Tamworth v. Town of New-Market, 3 N.H. 472 (N.H. Super. Ct. 1826).

Opinion

By the court.

In this ease it is stated, that the pauper went under a contract made by his father to live with Stevenson. As nothing appears to the contrary, it is to be presumed. that the father is still living ; and there is nothing stated in the case, from which it can be inferred, that the pauper was emancipated before he a;rived at the age of twenty-one years. The question then to he decided is, whether an infant, having a father living, and not being emancipated, could gain a settlement by residence, under the Provincial act of Geo. I cap. 87, or under the statute of Feb. 15, 171)1, sec. 7, without being warned to depart ?

Wc are of opinion, that he could not. It is believed to have been always considered as settled in this slate, that an infant, not emancipated, could gain no settlement by iesi-dence under those statutes. 1 N. H. Rep. 264, Hancock vs. Hampstead.—12 Mass. Rep. 383, Somerset vs. Dighton.

Judgment for plaintiffs,

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

Related

Salisbury v. Orange
5 N.H. 348 (Superior Court of New Hampshire, 1831)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
3 N.H. 472, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/town-of-tamworth-v-town-of-new-market-nhsuperct-1826.