London Sessions, Thursday...
t nis was an appeal on the part of hrTist thurch, Neweate-street, against an order obtained by the parish of St. Augustine, for the removal of a pauper, named Johit Surridge, and affords a curious spe- cimen of the manner by whicil it is contrived to swell the article "law expcnscs" to the excessive amount that it generallyappears in the accounts of almost every parish. The expenses of this appeal, even before it came to the final hearing, MIr. Law on the last ad- iourned day observed, would have purchased a sufficient annuity to have maintained the pauper for the rest of his life. From the history of the case as it came out in evidence. it appear. ed, that the pauper, who is now nearly 37 years of age, vas the illigitimate child of Alary Ann Surridge, a servant girl, by one John Al eredith, who at that time was a waiter at the New London tavern, Cheapsidt.The settlementof themotherbeingclearlyinChristUhurcli, the overseers of that parish, kne wing her to be pregnan t, took her be- fore the Lord l\fayor for examination,on the 10th of July. 1787, and. upon her oath,obtained a warrant to apprehend IlMeredith, the reputed father, when Mr. Lewis, his master, settl,d the business with the pa- rish officers, by advancing for his waiter401., which they receive tas an indemnification. The wozan was delivered in the October fol- lowing, and on the Sd of January, 1788, the child was baptized at Christ ( hurch, the entry In the book noting himu to be a pauper and a bastard, with the letters C. C; annexed, to signify that he belonged to Christ Church, and not to St. Leonard's, Foster-lane, Christ Church and St. Leonard being united parishes. It was ia evidence, that Christ Church relieved the mother, both before and at the time of her delivcry; and on the 26th of November following, that is, as soon as the child could safely be removed from the mother, took him into their workhouse; at the proper age, got him into the ward school, and had continued to relieve him almost constantly dluring a period of nearly 40 years down to the present time, and so, it should seem, would have continued to relieve him, but that some very inquisitive cleyer fellow happened to light upon the following entry in the churchwardens' accounts:-" 1787, Oct. 26.-Mary Surridge brought to bed of a niale child in the Old 'Change." Urn- less fraudulent collusion be proved, the place ol birtd of a bastard is his place of settlement. Old 'Change is in the parish of St. A ugus- tine. The mother of the pauper died some tinme since, but ani old woman nearlv 70, named Sarah Cook, was found, who recollected something about Surridge coming to lie-in at Nicholls's in the Old 'Change; ard upon these grounds, notwithstanding all tibeir acts of ownership, as Mr. L.aw termed them, for nearly 40 years, refused to relieve the pauPer anylenger. SL. A.ugustine then relieved him, and passed him, by the order of removal, aganst which Christ Church now appealed. The only additinl to the evidence of Mrs. Cook, who was not present at the birth, was the production of an examina. tion taken at the Mansion-house on the 20th of November, 1787, at the instance of the officers of St. Augustine, fbr the purPose of re- moving the mother and her son, then about five weeks old, to Christ Church. From this it was wished to be inferred that the child must have been born in St. Augustine's parish. The REgcoRDEn said, there were eases in which the birth-place of a bastard might not in law be the place of settlement, and in his judgment the evidence brought forward on the part of StL Aagustine's parish far outweighed that adduced in support of theappeal, and the Court confirmed the order of removal to Christ Churnh, dismissing tlie appeal, and,which is very unusual in cases of this sort, with costs. LONDON SESSIONS. THURSDAY. JUT.Y 15. CItnrST CIUT3uCH V. ST. AtlGUSTl}E.