Case Name: TOWN OF CHITTENDEN v. TOWN OF BARNARD
Court: Vermont Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Vermont
Decision Date: 1888-10
Citations: 61 Vt. 145
Docket Number: 
Parties: TOWN OF CHITTENDEN v. TOWN OF BARNARD.
Judges: 
Reporter: Vermont Reports
Volume: 61
Pages: 145–146

Head Matter:
TOWN OF CHITTENDEN v. TOWN OF BARNARD.
Pauper. Residence.
Pauper had a legal settlement in B. in 1868. That year he removed to S. where he resided, maintaining himself, until 1882, but not acquiring a settlement, since an order of removal to B. had heen made. In 1882, he removed to C. where he afterwards lived, being there supported by B. after 1884. Held, that under No. 42, acts of 1886, C. could not recover of B. for pauper’s support.
This was an action brought to charge the defendant town with the support of one John Cheedle, a pauper, and was heard in this court with the case of Worcester v. East Montpelier. It came here upon exceptions by the plaintiff to the judgment of the Rutland County Court, September Term, 1887, Rowell, J., presiding, where it was heard upon the following agreed statement of facts:
“ Said Cheedle was born in Barnard in 1828 ; when eight years old he was bound out by the overseer of the poor of said town of Barnard to one Willard Crowell of Barnard and lived with him until he was twenty-one years old. Cheedle thereafter supported himself in Barnard until 1865, when he was taken sick and was thereupon supported by said Barnard until 1868. In 1868 Cheedle went to visit his sister, then residing in Stock-bridge, Vermont. The town of Barnard. • bore liis -expenses in going to Stockbridge and paid his sister toward his support for three or four months. The overseer of Barnard then or about that time requested Cheedle to return to the poor-house in Barnard. Cheedle did not return and thereupon Barnard declined further support. Cheedle remained in Stockbridge thereafter and thereupon took up his residence there, keeping house with his family and effects, supporting himself and family until the fall of 1882, when he removed to said Chittenden, where ho has been ever since. He supported himself in Chittenden until the spring of 1884:, when he was taken sick and thereupon said Chittenden was applied to for his relief and support. The overseer of Chittenden, at once, notified the overseer of Barnard of Cheedle’s condition, whereupon the overseer of Barnard came to Chittenden and assumed the support of Cheedle and entered into a contract with one Timothy Cheedle, a brother of the pauper, residing in Chittenden, to board said John. Under this contract the town of. Barnard supported said John Cheedle in Chittenden as aforesaid, from April 1,1881, until March 1,1887, when .the overseer of Barnard notified said Timothy that Barnard would support said John no longer. Since March 1, 1887, said Chittenden has furnished the support of said John. May 2, 1887, the overseer of Chittenden notified the overseer of Barnard as by the notice in writing hereto attached. While said John resided in Stockbridge as aforesaid, he did not gain a legal settlement in that town for the reason that an order of removal to Barnard was duly made on him and served on the overseer of Barnard, on the ground that said J ohn was liable to become chargeable to Stockbridge, which order was not appealed from.
G. 8. Colburn and F. C. Swinington for the plaintiff.
W. E. Johnson for the defendant.

Opinion:
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Royoe, Ch. J.
This case was heard with Worcester v. East Montpelier, supra, and as under the decision in that case the agreed statement of facts in this fails to show a legal residence of the pauper in the defendant town.
The judgment of the County Court is affirmed.