Opinion
APRIL TERM, 1776.
ON Certiorari to Chester, to remove an order and judgment of sessions, for the removal of James Heany.
Exceptions taken to the proceedings below — That it did not appear the pauper had been examined; nor was any reason set forth why he was not: That natural justice required he should be heard before he was removed. And the following cases were cited: — 2 Salk. 488. to shew the examination must be by two Justices. — 2 Stra. 1092. S.P. And. 238. — Sett. Cas. c. 18.
But it was answered: Ist. That it was not necessary that the examination should appear on the face of the order. Justices are not obliged to set forth evidence, or every little circumstance; that when nothing is set forth which appears to be wrong, the Court will make an intendment in favour of their order. An order to a common intent good. 1 Stra. 211. That it is not necessary to set forth the summons and examination of the party. — 1 Stra. 474. 630. 211, 2d, Lord Ray. 1406.
2d. That even if it was necessary, there are words in the order equivalent, viz. on due consideration, which implies due examination — 3 Burn. Sess. Cas. Also the words due proof. Also the words on the examination of Samuel Heany " as otherwise."
That in the cases from Salkeld, there appeared a defect of examination on the order, it having been taken by one Justice instead of two.
BY THE COURT. — No case can be shewn, where an order was deemed bad, because the examination did not appear on the face of the order.
Comb. 474. is a book of no great authority, and this case is contradicted by many others. — We are of opinion that it is not necessary that an examination should appear on the face of the order; nor is it necessary that the examination of any person should be set forth. If any pauper was injured by a removal, the remedy might be had here, on information; and, though it will not restore him, yet he might have complained to the sessions, where every thing was open.
The order of Sessions confirmed, with costs.