Case ID: mass_19/html/0568-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

The Inhabitants of Reading versus The Inhabitants of Tewksbury.
    A citizen dwelling in a town ten years, and having taxable property five of those - years, does not gain a settlement in the twelfth mode mentioned in St. 1793, c. 34 if the assessors, for a sufficient reason, omit to tax him.
    Assumpsit for expenses incurred by the plaintiffs in the support of some paupers, who derived their settlement from William Pearson. Pearson resided in Tewksbury for more than ten years after the passing of St. 1793, c. 34, and the plaintiffs alleged that he gained a settlement there by reason of his being a person who ought to have been taxed for five of those years. The counsel for the plaintiffs contended at the trial, that if he had taxable property and was omitted to be taxed by reason of accident, mistake, or any other cause whatsoever, the verdict should be for the plaintiffs, and the jury were so directed. A verdict was returned for the plaintiffs, the jury being of opinion that Pearson had taxable property for more than five of the ten years. They however stated, that the assessors of Tewksbury did not omit to tax him to prevent his gaining a settlement there, but for some other cause concerning which the jury could not agree. If the direction was wrong, a new trial was to be granted.
    
      Stearns and Locke, for the defendants,
    cited St. 1821, c. 107, § 6.
    Hoar, for the plaintiffs,
    relied on Wrentham v. Attleborough, 5 Mass. R. 430.
   The Court were of opinion, that the jury ought to have found the reason, why Pearson was not taxed ; whether it was on account of age, infirmity, or poverty, or through mistake, or from some other cause. The assessors might have properly omitted to tax him;1 which must depend on the circumstances existing at the time.

New trial granted. 
      
        Burton v. Wakefield, 4 N. Hamp. R. 47 ; Weare v. New Boston, 3 N. Hamp. B 203.
      So a person does not acquire a legal settlement by residing in a town ten years together and paying takes there for any five of these ten years, if with in that time he is committed to gaol, and while there applies for and receives relief as a pauper from the gaoler. East Sudbury v. Sudbury, 12 Pick. 1. See also Westbrook v. Bowdoinham,7 Greenl. 363 ; Attleborough v. Middleborough, 10 Pick. 378