An order of removal after forty days' residence will not avoid the gaining a settlement under 59 G. III. c. 50, unless it produces the effect of making the pauper or his family abandon the tenement. Thus, where the order directed the removal of the pauper and his family, and the pauper alone was removed, but returned the same day, occupied the rest of the year, and paid his rent, part in goods and part in money, he was held to gain a settlement (t).

Payment of Rent.]-The party hiring must, under this act, himself pay the whole year's rent, whatever its amount (u); and payment after his death, though out of his assets, cannot confer a settlement on his widow (x). Whether payment by distress will satisfy this act, as a payment by the party, is not expressly decided (y): but it would probably be held that it will not, being made out of that, over which the pauper had no control (z). The occupation and payment of rent must not be under different hirings (a). The year's rent must be paid at the time the order of removal from the parish is made (6). Reduction of rent during the year will not affect the settlement, if the occupation continue for the year, and 107. is paid for that time (c). A settlement is gained by a pauper who has occupied a tenement for a year, rated at 107. and

on 6 G. IV. c. 57, as stated by Parke and Patteson, Js., in R. v. Banbury (Inh.), 1 Ad. & E. 142, 144, which was decided differently on 1 W. IV. c. 18, see post, R. v. Banbury. R. v. Tadcaster, will not be extended, S. C.

(t) R. v. Barham, 8 B. & C. 99. See R. v. Fillongley, 2 T. R. 709; and R. v. Kenilworth, id. 598, as remarked on in R. v. Willoughby, 4 Ad. & E. 152.

(u) R. v. Carshalton, 6 B. & C. 93; R. v. Kibworth Harcourt, 7 B. & C. 790; R. v. Ditcheat, 9 B. & Cr. 183. See p. 821, n. (r).

(x) R. v. Crayford, 6 B. & C. 68. (y) R. v. Carshalton, 6 B. & Cr. 93; and cases collected, 2 Ad. & E. 600. As to payment by the landlord accepting tenant's fixtures as an equivalent, see R. v. Merthyr Tidvill, 1 B. & Adol. 29. See p. 821, n. (u).

(z) R. v. Pakefield, stated post, p. 823. Adhered to by Q. B. in R. v. Melsonby, 12 Ad. & E. 687, on argument that payment of rent by any means would suffice. The exact point, however, was not raised by the facts in R. v. Melsonby: for the landlord had accepted another tenant, and distrained fixtures, which the latter was to

take of pauper, for rent due from both; so that it could not be said that this was a payment of rent for the last half year of the pauper's occupation" by the person hiring the premises, S. C." It did not appear what pauper's fixtures sold for. It was held in Hooper v. Stevens, 4 Ad. & E. 71, that delivery of goods between debtor and creditor in reduction of demand, operated as payment within the statute of limitation. But in Reg. v. Cranbrook (Inh.), 1 New Sess. C. 5, the sessions not having found that a payment by pauper to his landlord on account was to be appropriated to make up 107., a year's rent, of which part had been paid before, the court of Q. B. refused to infer such appropriation.

(a) Reg. v. Melsonby.

(b) R. v. Ampthill, 2 B. & Cr. 847; but see R. v. Barham, 8 B. & Cr. 99; R. v. Willoughby, 4 Ad. & E. 152, on 1 W. IV. c. 18, S. C.; stated post, p. 823-4.

(c) Rent 167. payable quarterly. In second and succeeding two quarters, 108. a quarter was taken off, R. v. St. Mary Kalendar, 9 Ad. & E. 626.

paid 101. in respect of it, though the sum of 6s. for tithes was agreed to be paid, and was paid, by his landlord (d).

Of the Law as altered by 6 G. IV. c. 57, and 1 W. IV. c. 18, s. 2, after the Repeal of 59 G. III. c. 50-with a Sketch of the Leading Decisions on gaining a Settlement by having Rented a Tenement between 22nd June, 1825, and 30th March, 1831.]-The statute 6 G. IV. c. 57, passed on 22nd June, 1825, recites in s. 1, that the settlement of the poor has been made in some instances to depend on the annual value of tenements which they may have rented, or upon the annual value of tenements in virtue of which they have paid parochial rates; and that the ascertaining such value in such respective cases has given rise to very expensive litigation, and that doubts had been entertained whether 59 G. III. c. 50, had been effectual for the purpose of altering the law in respect of the necessity of proving the annual value of tenements so rented.

It then repeals that act; and by s. 2 (without effecting any revivor of 13 & 14 C. II. c. 12) (e), enacts, that no person shall acquire a settlement in any parish or township maintaining its own poor, by, or by reason of settling upon, renting (ƒ), or paying parochial taxes (g) for any tenement not being his or her own property, unless such tenement shall consist of a separate and distinct (h) dwelling-house or building, or of land, or of both, boná fide rented (i) by such person in such parish or township, at and for the sum of 107. a year at the least, for the term of one whole year (k); nor unless such house, or building, or land, shall be occupied under such yearly hiring, and the rent for the same to the amount of 107. actually paid, for the term of one whole

66

(e) R. v. Carshalton, 6 B. & Cr. 93. (f)"Renting" as here taken together with yearly hiring means yearly renting, and is the same with "hiring," per Patteson, J., Reg. v. Pontefract, 2 Q. B. R. 556.

(g) Including land-tax, R. v. East Teignmouth, 1 B. & Adol. 244; and all levies collected within the parish, R. v. Ringstead, 7 B. & C. 607. See also p. 825.

(h) See cases on these words in 59 G. III. c. 50, ante, p. 813, which apply

here.

(i) Coupled with what follows imports hiring for a year, per Williams, J., in Reg. v. Pontefract (Recorder), 2 Q. B.

556; and should be so stated in examinations, Reg. v. St. Sepulchre, Northampton (Inh.), 14 L. J. (M. C.) 8.

(k) A house and land were taken by lease "for the term of six months from the first of January next," (1830), "and so on from six months to six months, until one of the said parties shall give to the other of them six calendar months' notice in writing to determine the tenancy, at and under the rent of 137. for every six months; the first payment to be made on the first of July, 1830." It was held that the months here spoken of were shown by the context to be calendar months, and that this was a taking for a year at least, by which a settlement might be gained under the above section, Reg. v. Chawton (Inh.), 1 Q. B. 247.

year at the least; provided always that it shall not be necessary to prove the actual value of such tenement.

The tenement must be of the like nature, viz. separate and distinct house or building, or land, or both, hired in the same way for a year, and at the same rent, 107. in order to satisfy 6 G. IV. c. 57, as was required under 59 G. III. c. 50.

User or Occupation of Tenement rented between 22nd June, 1825, and 30th March, 1831.]-No distinction is made by 6 G. IV. c. 57, as to user and occupation, between house or building, and land; but the tenement, whether consisting of one description only, or of both, must be occupied under the yearly hiring (1) for a year ending within the hirer's lifetime (m); though it need not all be occupied by the hirer, and any part may be underlet by him, if he dwell in the rest (n). So the occupation is sufficient, if before the end of the year the tenant locks up the house, leaving some few things in it, and removes with his family to his house in another parish (o).

If a separate house and land are let conjointly for a year, but the times of entering on and quitting them be different, viz. Lady-day and May-day, the occupation of each for a whole year, with payment of rent for a year, makes an occupation of a tenement for one whole year sufficient to confer a settlement under 6 G. IV. c. 57 (p). A like residence for forty days is necessary under both acts (q).

Payment of Rent.]—Under 59 G. III. c. 50, the whole year's rent must have been paid, whatever its amount (r); but the consequence being, that payment of 9997. out of 1,000l. the year's rent, would not confer that settlement, while the payment of 107. only, if a whole year's rent, would, it was enacted, on 30th March, 1831, by 1 W. IV. c. 18, s. 2, that where the yearly rent exceeds 107., payment to that amount (s) shall be deemed sufficient for the purpose of gaining a set

(1) R. v. Kibworth Harcourt, 7 B. & Cr. 790.

(m) S. C.; R. v. Carshalton, 7 B. & Cr. 96; R. v. Ditcheat, 9 B. & Cr. 183. See R. v. Crayford, S. P. on 59 G. III. c. 50, ante, p. 817.

(n) R. v. Ditcheat, 9 B. & Cr. 176; 4 Man. & Ry. 151; R. v. Great Bentley, 10 B. & Cr. 520; 5 Man. & Ry. 559.

(0) Reg. v. St. Mary Kalendar (Inh.), 9 Ad. & E. 626; 1 P. & D. 497, S. C. The tenant offered the key to the land

lady, but she would not receive it till the end of the year, when the full rent was paid.

(p) R. v. Ormesby (Inh.), 4 B. & Ad. 214; and see R. v. North Collingham, 1 B. & Cr. 578.

(q) R. v. Ditcheat (Inh.), 9 B. & Cr. 176.

(r) R. v. Kibworth Harcourt, 7 B. & Cr. 790; 2 Man. & Ry. 28; R. v. Ramsgate, 6 B. & Cr. 713; R. v. Ashley Hay, 8 B. & C. 27; 2 Man. & Ry. 21. (s) This enactment dispenses with

tlement under 6 G. IV. c. 57. This section operates retrospectively on hirings of tenements since 22nd June, 1825 (t).

From 22nd June, 1825, (viz. the passing of 6 Geo. IV. c. 57,) to 30th March, 1831, the year's rent might be paid by any person, and the "person hiring the same was no longer obliged to pay it himself, as under 59 G. III. c. 50 (u). But this has been altered since the latter

date.

It seems that payment of the year's rent, after an order of removal executed, is sufficient to confer a settlement since this act (x).

Law of renting Tenement since 30th March, 1831:-viz. Under Statutes 1 W. IV. c. 18, s. 1, and 4 & 5 W. IV. c. 76, s. 66.]—By 1 W. IV. c. 18, s. 1 (which passed 30th March, 1831, and is prospective only) (y), after reciting 6 G. IV. c. 57, it is stated, "and whereas doubts had arisen with respect to the intention of the legislature concerning the occupation of such house, building, or land, (viz. those mentioned in 6 G. IV. c 57,) by the person hiring the same, and concerning the amount of the rent to be paid and the person paying the same; and whereas it is expedient that such doubts should be removed," and is enacted, that from and after the passing of the act, (viz. 30th March, 1831,) no person shall acquire a settlement in any parish or township maintaining its own poor, by or by reason of such yearly hiring of a dwelling-house or building, or of land, or of both, as in the said act (6 G. IV. c. 57) expressed, unless such house, or building, or land shall be "actually occupied under such yearly hiring," in the same parish or township, by the person hiring the same, for the term of one whole year at the least, and unless the rent for the same, to the amount of 101. at the least (z), shall be paid by the person hiring the same.

Payment of Poor's-Rates for a Year requisite.]--And by 4 & 5 W. IV. c. 76, s. 66, from and after 14th August, 1834,"no settle

payment of a whole year's rent, if 107. of it is paid, as well in a settlement claimed by payment of rates as by renting a tenement, Reg. v. Brighton (or Brighthelmstone) (Inh.), 1 Q. B. 674.

(t) R. v. Dursley, 3 B. & Adol. 465. (u) R. v. Kibworth Harcourt, 7 B. & C. 790. Thus, letting in payments by overseers of another parish in bonâ fide relief of pauper, R. v. Tillingham, 1 B. & Adol. 180. Secus, if with fraudulent

intent of completing his settlement in a parish, R. v. St. Sepulchre, Cambridge, id. 924, and semble payments by distress.. See as to this the cases collected 2 Ad.. & E. 600; ante, p. 818, note (z); R. v. Pakefield stated, post, p. 823.

(x) R. v. Willoughby, 4 Ad. & E. 152. Stated post, p. 823, 824; S. C. 5 N. & M. 457, on 1 W. IV. c. 18.

(y) R. v. Ruthin, 5 B. & Adol. 215. (z) See as to these words, p. 819.

ment shall be acquired or completed by occupying a tenement unless the person occupying the same shall have been assessed (a) to the poor'srate, and shall have paid the same in respect of such tenement for one year" (b).

A settlement may still be gained, under 3 & 4 W. & M. c. 11, s. 6, by payment of poor's-rates, though the occupier has been assessed and paid them for part of the year only, and has let part of the tenement to lodgers since 1 W. IV. c. 18; provided his renting and occupation satisfy the act in force at the time (viz. 6 G. IV. c. 57) (c). So, though the whole year's rent be not paid, if 107. is (d).

The three modern acts, 59 G. III., 6 G. IV., and 1 W. IV., require the same residence of forty days, and the same hiring and renting for a year of a tenement of the same nature and description; but it having been held, under 59 G. III., that a house might be underlet in part, and under 6 G. IV. that a house or land might be so underlet, the act 1 W. IV. c. 18 seems to have been intended to prevent a settlement being gained after any such underletting (e).

What Occupation of the Tenement is requisite since 1 W. IV. c. 18 (passed 30th March, 1831).]-To obtain this settlement in respect of a" dwelling-house or building," it must be "separate and distinct" within the decisions on these words in 6 G. IV. c. 57, and 59 G. III. c. 50; and the hirer must actually occupy for the year the whole of the house or building which he rents (f). For, if he underlets any portion of it, however small, at however low a rent, for any time, however short, so as by such underletting to confer on another the right to exclusive occupation of that part which is occupied accordingly by the lodger, the hirer of the house has not the "actual" occupation of it required by 1 W. IV. c. 18, and cannot therefore obtain this settlement (g).

But an innkeeper, by merely taking an inmate, does not exclude himself from a settlement, for the guest's occupation is his (h); and

(a) An occupier of a dwelling-house who pays is "assessed," though his name is not in the poor's-rate as occupier, Reg. v. Hulme (Inh.), 4 Q. B. 538. See Reg. v. St. Olave, Southwark (Inh.), post, p. 826, 828.

(b) See s. 68 of this act, post, which does not seem intended to apply to this species of settlement, though its words are ample enough to embrace it.

(c) Reg. v. St. Mary Kalendar, 9 Ad. & E. 626; 1 P. & D. 497, S. C.

Decided on a renting which began after the passing of 4 & 5 W. IV. c. 76, s. 66. See post, pp. 826, 828.

(d) Reg. v. Brighton (Inh.), 1 Q. B.

674.

(e) R. v. Ditcheat, 9 B. & C. 183. (f) See per Patteson, J., in R. v. Great Usworth, 5 Ad. & E. 263.

(g) R. v. St. Nicholas, Rochester, 5 B. & Adol. 219; R. v. St. Nicholas, Colchester, 2 Ad. & E. 599.

(h) Per Denman, C. J., 2 Ad. & E.

604.