The Town of Canton vs. The Town of Simsbury

The Town of Canton vs. The Town of Simsbury. Hartford District, May T., 1886. Park, C. J., Carpenter, Pardee, Loomis and Granger, Js. A minor, born in Massachusetts, was supported by that state for several years during his minority at the Deaf and Dumb Asylum at Hartford in this state. Prom there he went, about three years before his majority, to the town of G, where he staid nearly two years. He then went to the town of S, where he became of age and remained for nearly twenty years, supporting himself, but with no taxes assessed against him. Held that he acquired a settlement in S. While residing in Ohe was an inhabitant of that town, though having no settlement there, and although a minor, and when he removed from there to S he began to acquire a settlement in the latter town as an inhabitant of one town removing to another, under Gen. Statutes, p. 196, sec. 4. [Argued May 18th decided June 18th, 1886.] Action to recover money expended in the support of a pauper claimed to belong to the defendant town; brought to the Court of Common Pleas in Hartford County, and heard before Calhoun, J. Facts found and judgment rendered for the plaintiff and appeal by the defendant. The case is fully stated in the opinion. T. M. Maltbie and P. S. Bryant, for the appellant. C. H. Briscoe and J. P. Andrews, with whom was F. M. Mills, for the appellee. [MAJORITY — Pardee, J.] Pardee, J. Moses G. Wise was born in Hew Hampshire and came thence into the town of Canton in this state in his minority and has there since continued to reside, a voter but not a settled inhabitant either by admission or the ownership of real estate. During a temporary stay in Massachusetts in 1846 his son Henry A. A. Wise, the pauper, was born. From 1858 to 1865 the last named state supported this son as a pauper—for eight or nine years at the Deaf and Dumb Asylum in Hartford in this state. He left the Asylum some three years or more before attaining majority and went thence to his father’s house in Canton and remained a few months, and then to the house of his employer in the same town for about eighteen months, and from thence to Simsbury in 1866, where he has had his domicil to this present; voting there from 1867 to 1884, two years perhaps excepted. He was self-supporting, and no taxes were assessed against him, from the time of leaving the Asylum to July, 1885. In that month he was temporarily in Canton, was injured and required immediate public aid from that town. It was given and this suit is for repayment. The plaintiff had judgment in the court below, and the defendant appeals. It is the contention of the defendant that the pauper could not become a settled inhabitant of Simsbury without admission or ownership of real estate. The fact that the state of Massachusetts supported him during several years does not determine the law of this case. The condition of being a pauper is not unalterable; the brand is not ineffaceable. Two or three years before his majority that state ceased to aid him; he then went to and became and during two years continued to be a self-supporting inhabitant of Canton—none the less so if we should concede that he had a legal settlement in Massachusetts; he could elect to have his domicil elsewhere. A minor is an inhabitant in the eye of the pauper law. An inhabitant of Canton, he removed thence into Simsbury in 1866; attaining majority there in 1867, there he has resided hitherto, self-supporting, with no taxes assessed. Thereby under the statute he acquired a legal settlement in his own right in the last named town. Town of New Hartford v. Town of Canaan, 64 Conn., 39. There is no error in the judgment complained of. In this opinion the other judges concurred.