41 Vt. 168 | Vt. | 1868
The opinion of the court was delivered by
We find no occasion in this case to revise or dis
We think the adjudication in the case of Chelsea v. Washington in 1852, is conclusive upon Washington as to the settlement of the pauper’s mother being in Washington. At the time the order in that case was made, the pauper was only some eighteen or nineteen years old. That adjudication precludes in the present case any inquiry into facts precedent to such adjudication, as affecting the question as to her settlement in this. case.
The pauper, being her bastard son, had by derivation, at the fime of said adjudication, the settlement of his mother. He has not gained any other settlement in his own right. This fixes Ms settlement in Washington. The cases of Hartland v. Williamstown, 1 Aikens, 241, Dorset v. Manchester, 3 Vt., 370, Stowe v. Brookfield, 26 Vt., 524, leave no open ground for debate upon this aspect of the case, and render of no account the warning out of the pauper’s grandparents, in 1815, by the town of Washington.
The judgment is affirmed.