The Queen, at the prosecution of The Poor Law Commissioners, v The Guardians of The Poor of The Limerick Union

JurisdictionIreland
Judgment Date22 November 1844
Date22 November 1844
CourtQueen's Bench Division (Ireland)

Queenƒ€™s Bench.

THE QUEEN, At the prosecution of the POOR LAW COMMISSIONERS,
and
THE GUARDIANS OF THE POOR OF THE LIMERICK UNION.

Rex v. Windham Cowp. 378.

Rex v. The Bishop of ChesterENR 1 T. R. 396.

Rex v. The Bank of EnglandENR 2 Doug. 524.

Regina v. The Guardians of the Bramtree Union 1 A. & E., N. S. 142.

Rex v. The Poor Law Commissioners 6 A. & E. 54.

Ex parte Robins 7 D.P.C. 568.

Rex v. The Company of the Nottingham Water Works 6 A. & E. 355; S. C. 1 N. & Per. 480.

Rex v. The Severn Railway CompanyENR 2 B. & Al. 650.

Rex v. The Commissioners of Dean 2 M. & Sel. 80.

402 CASES AT LAW. M. T. 1844. Queen' 8.13ench. THE QUEEN, At the prosecution of the POOR LAW COMMISSIONERS, v. THE GUARDIANS OE THE POOR OF THE LIMERICK UNION. IN this case a conditional order had been obtained, that a writ of manÂÂdamus do issue to the Board of Guardians of the Poor of the Limerick Union, to obey the order of the Poor Law Commissioners of the 5th of June 1844; and to meet on the day of the week and hour of the day, and at the place already appointed for holding the ordinary meetings, and hold an ordinary meeting once at least in every week, for the execution of their duties, unless cause shown in six days after the service of this order. This conditional order was obtained on the affidavit of William J. Handcock, one of the Assistant Poor Law Commissioners, which stated that certain portions of the county of Limerick had, by an order of the Poor Law Commissioners, been formed into a union for the relief of the destitute poor : that by another order the Commissioners had directed and declared the guardians of the union so formed should, subject to the general power of the Poor Law Commissioners, have the direction and control of the union, &c.: that in pursuance of such order, the guarÂÂdians appointed Wednesday in each week for holding their meetings ; and that such meetings were regularly held for some time. The affidavit then set forth several other orders of the Commissioners, and then stated that on the 9th of October 1844, the ex-officio guardians of said union, with the exception of one, announced their intention of withdrawing from the board ; and that on the same day the elected guardians, with the exception of one, tendered their resignation to the Poor Law CommisÂÂsioners, which was transmitted to the Poor Law Commissioners by the clerk of the union. That in reply, the Commissioners had written to each of the guardians, refusing to accept the resignation tendered by him. That since the guardians had tendered their resignations to the CommisÂÂsioners, they had not met for the discharge of business on two of their usual and ordinary days of meeting, by reason whereof the standing orders of the Commissioners were neglected. An affidavit was made in reply to this order by William Monsell, the chairman of the late Board of Guardians, stating that he, and several others of the guardians, had acted for several successive years, and that when he had been re-elected in the month of March last, bp CASES AT LAW. 403 accepted the office in the confidence that no alteration would be made by the Commissioners in the then existing powers of the guardians. That the guardians considered it important to them in the discharge of their duties, that the clerk of the union should be under their control. That by an order of the Commissioners, dated the 3rd of May 1844, it was provided that every payment exceeding 3 should be made by a check drawn on the treasurer of the union, signed by the chairman and two guardians, and countersigned by the clerk. That by an order of the 5th of June 1844, part of the former order was rescinded, and it was proÂÂvided by that order, that the guardians should pay any sum greater than 3 by an order on the treasurer, signed by the chairman of the meeting and two other guardians...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • The Queen at the prosecution of The Poor-Law Commissioners v The Guardians of The Poor of The Tuam Union
    • Ireland
    • Queen's Bench Division (Ireland)
    • 20 Abril 1846
    ...OF THE POOR OF THE TUAM UNION. Reina v. Mayor of HerefordENR 6 Mod. 309. The Queen v. The Guardians of the Poor of the Limerick Union 7 Ir. Law Rep. 402. Rex v. Mayor of AbingdonENR 1 Ld. Raym. 559. Rex v. Trinity College 3 Law Rec. N. S. 150. Regina v. The Mayor ad Burgesses of PooleENR 1 ......
  • The Poor-Law Commissioners v The Guardians of The Poor of The Clones Union
    • Ireland
    • Queen's Bench Division (Ireland)
    • 27 Enero 1845
    ...OF THE POOR OF THE CLONES UNION. The King v. The Poor-law Commissioners 6 A. & E. 54. The Queen v. The Guardians of the Limerick Union 7 Ir. Law Rep. 402. 26 CASES AT LAW. H. T. 1845. Queen' sBeneli. THE POOR-LAW COMMISSIONERS v. THE GUARDIANS OF THE POOR OF THE CLONES UNION.* MANDAMUS.-In ......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT