Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1891-04-03
VERMONTiS PAUPER LAWS.


important Decision by the supreme
Cour!.
At tue time the Newport HiGhgate pauper
case was on trial in Orleans County Court
a full review of the matter was given in these
columns. The SupIem Court has Just
banded down decision bearing on this case
concerning which Highgate correspondent
writes the St Adams Messenger rs follows
From the earliest history of the State our
pauper law has been fruitful source of
litigation between towns, and quite large
amount of money has heretofore been ex-
pended in contesting, constituting and set
Ting the law, prior to 1856.
Before tho session OF the Legislature of
1856, tho law recognized two classes OF
paupers, termed resident and transient pau
pcrs and there was n further distinction at
tached to the class called resident That
class gained a distinction 10y remaining
certain number of years in a certain town,
and thereby gained what was callel
. legal settlement.
After having gained a legal settlement in
a town, the pauper retained 1T in that
town, until another was acquired by like
subsequent residence in another town
The transient paupers were those who re-
CURED help when absent from home, in an
other town, and were suddenly taken sick
or disabled, SO that they were unable to re
turn home, and required assistance.
In the case of the pauper who had come
10 IA town to reside, and had legal settle
ment in another town, an order of removal
was resorted to, to return him to his own
town, of legal settlement; and for the sup
port of u transient the town furnishing the
aid might maintain an action against the
town where the pauper had the legal settle
ment.
The Legislature of 1856 made radical
change in the pauper law. 1t abolished the
whole of chapter l3j, relating to removal OF
paupers, and substituted for the words
legally settled - or legal settlement, the
| word residence" ana retained the tran
sient law as it was before with additions
and improvement Since the passage OF the
new law, the people, the lawyers and the
judges have been puzzled to know what 1t
meant and large number and a variety of
suits have arisen.
The new law abolished ali derivative set
tloments and took away the right of remov-
al, but retained the right to recover for aid
furnished the transient,
1t was contended that by virtue Of sec
ton IS, No. ~, of acts Of 1856, all persons
were transient in a town until they had re
! sided therein three full years. Several cases
went to the supreme Court, but this ques-
ton was not raised or settled. Three cases
were pending, VIZ, Newport vs.. llighgate,
New Haven vs.. Middebury, Chittenden vs..
Stockbridge, and all were involving the
same question. At the February term OF
the Supreme Court at Middlebury, the case
OF New Haven vs.. Middebury was heard,
and the subject was referred to all the
judges, and they all concur i'll the opinion
which has lately been handed down by Chief
Justice Ross, in that case. Under the law
as it now stands, it is tue duty of every
town TO support all paupors found or resid
my in u town; that one town cannot main
tain an action against another for support
of a pauper residing therein.
The learned judge briefly disposes of al
questions as to transient and resident pau
pers and defines the two classes as follows
The word transient is the opposite of resi-
dent, tho latter describes the person at res
in town, while the former Describes hin
in his passage through or across it.
No better or more simple rule could b'
laid down, a guide to the people o. tn
State, to distinguish between the tive
! classes,