one who had always been able to support himself and family by manual labor, though the wages earned by him were not more than sufficient for that purpose, was not a pauper, within the meaning of the statute; and where, having been a resident of the city and county of New York he went to another county, and there met with an accident, which rendered him unable to support himself, the county from whence he came is not liable for his support. Supreme Court, Janu ary, 1889, Wood v. Simmons, 4 N. Y. Supp. 368; s. c. 51 Hun, 325.

§ 53. Neglect to contest. If there shall be a neglect to take and remove such poor person, and to serve notice of such denial within the time above prescribed, the county superintendents and overseers, respectively, whose duty it was so to do, their successors, and their respective counties, cities or towns, shall be deemed to have acquiesced in the allegations contained in such first notice, and shall be forever precluded from contesting the same, and their counties, cities and towns, respectively, shall be liable for the expenses of the support of such poor person, which may be recovered from time to time, by county superintendents incurring such expenses, in the name of their county in actions against the county, city or town so liable.

§ 54. Actions, when and how to be brought. Upon service of any such notice of denial, the county superintendents upon whom the same may be served, shall, within three months, commence an action in the name of their county, against the town, city or county so liable for the expenses incurred in the support of such poor person, and prosecute the same to effect; if they neglect to do so, their town, city or county, shall be precluded from all claim against the town, city or county to whose officers such first notice was directed.

If a local law and the Poor Law conflict, "One must yield to the other, and as the Poor Law is uniform and general in its provisions it should not be defeated or set at naught by a special act passed for the purpose of regulating and controlling the affairs of a single city." Supreme Court, June, 1909, Onondaga Co. v. City of Amsterdam.

§ 55. Penalty for bringing foreign poor into this state. Any person who shall knowingly bring or remove, or cause to be brought or removed, any poor person from any place without this state, into any county, city or town within it, and there leave or attempt to leave such poor person, with intent to

make any such county, city or town, or the state, wrongfully chargeable with his support, shall forfeit fifty dollars, to be re covered by an action in a court of competent jurisdiction in the county, and in the name of the county, city or town into which such poor person shall be brought, and shall be obliged to convey such person out of the state, or support him at his own expense, and shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and the court or magistrate before whom any person shall be convicted for a violation of this section shall require of such person satisfactory security that he will within a reasonable time, to be named by the court or magistrate, transport such person out of the state, or indemnify the town, city or county for all charges and expenses which may be incurred in his support; and if such person shall refuse to give such security when so required, the court or magistrate shall commit him to the common jail of the county for a term not exceeding three months.

Overseers of the poor, who have expended money, under an order for the maintenance of a pauper, cannot maintain an action on the case against the person who brought the pauper into the town, having no legal settlement in the state, for the amount so expended; but their remedy is under the statute to recover the penalty given in such case. Supreme Court, May, 1814, Crouse v. Mabbett et al., 11 Johns. 167.

The penalty given by statute for bringing a poor, or indigent person, not having a settlement, into any city or town within this State without legal authority, is incurred as well by bringing such person from one town to another town within the State, as by bringing him from without the State. To subject a party to the penalty, it must be shown that he acted mala fide; it seems, that carriers of passengers are within the letter, but not within the spirit of the act, and cannot be charged, unless in bringing poor and indigent persons into a city or town, and leaving them there, they acted fraudulently. Proof by an inhabi tant long a resident in the town, that he had never known the pauper, is prima facie sufficient evidence that the pauper has not a legal settlement in the town. Supreme Court, May, 1832, Thomas v. Ross & Shaw, 8 Wend. 672.

§ 56. Poor children under sixteen years of age. No justice of the peace, board of charities, police justice, or other magistrate, or court, shall commit any child under sixteen years of age, as a vagrant, truant or disorderly person, to any jail or county almshouse, but to some reformatory, or other institution, as provided for in the case of juvenile delinquents; and when such commitments are made, the justice of the peace, board of charities, police justice, or other magistrate or court making the same, shall immediately give notice to the superintendents of the poor or other

authorities having charge of the poor of the county in which the commitment was made, giving the name and age of the person committed, to what institution, and the time for which committed; nor shall any county superintendents, overseers of the poor, board of charity, or other officer, send any child under the age of sixteen years, as a poor person, to any county almshouse, for support and care, or retain any such child in such almshouse, but shall provide for such child or children in families, orphan asylums, hospitals, or other appropriate institutions for the support and care of children as provided by law, except that a child under two years of age may be sent with its mother, who is a poor person, to any county almshouse, but not longer than until it is two years of age. The boards of supervisors of the several counties, and board of estimate and apportionment of the city of New York, and the appropriate board or body in other cities and towns shall take such action in the matter as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of this section. When any such child is committed to an orphan asylum or reformatory, it shall, when practicable, be committed to an asylum or reformatory that is governed or controlled by persons of the same religious faith as the parents of such child. When any child who shall have been placed in an asylum, or other institution, as a poor person, in pursuance of this section, shall remain therein at the expense of the county or town to which such poor child is chargeable, the superintendents of the poor of such county, or the overseer of the poor of such town, may remove such child from such asylum or other institution and place such child in some similar institution or make such other disposition of such child as is provided by law.

(As amended by chapter 347 of the Laws of 1909.)

This action was brought by the plaintiff, a corporation organized under the laws of this State for the care, education and support of poor orphan children, to recover the amount due it for supporting certain children between the age of two and sixteen years, residents of Long Island City, and whom it had received, cared for and supported, on authority of written orders given by the overseer of the poor of the defendant city.

Held, that the plaintiff was entitled to recover, as it had acted under the direction of an officer, who had full power to give such direction, and who was compelled by law to furnish the support for such children outside of the poorhouse, and in an incorporated orphan asylum.

That, as the relief of the children was permanent and not temporary, the $10 limitation imposed by section 42 of 2 Revised Statutes (7th ed., page

1861), did not apply to them. Supreme Court, May, 1888, Nuns of St. Dominick v. Long Island City, 48 Hun. 308

Relator was a charitable institution incorporated under chap. 319, of 1848, and having the approval of the state board of charities under chap. 446, of 1883. Under the statutes and by commitments not in all respects perfect, children were sent to relator and its bills therefor audited by the supervisors; the defendant, county treasurer, refused to pay. Held, that the bills were a county charge and that the court would not here scrutinize the commitments with that care which it would exercise if the proceedings were a habeas corpus and the commitment were claimed to be illegal or insufficient. Supreme Court, July 7, 1890, People ex rel. Mt. Magdalen School v. Dickson, 32 St. Rep. 495; 57 Hun, 312; see In re Jurisdiction, 3 How. Pr. 39, 43, 44.

§ 57. Recovery from pauper who has property. If it shall at any time be ascertained that any person, who has been assisted by or received support from any town, city or county, has real or personal property, or if any such person shall die, leaving real or personal property, an action may be maintained in any court of competent jurisdiction, by the overseer of the poor of the town or city, or the superintendent of the poor of any county which has furnished or provided such assistance or support, or any part thereof, against such person or his or her estate, to recover such sums of money as may have been expended by their town, city or county in the assistance and support of such person during the period of ten years next preceding such discovery or death.

ARTICLE 5

Support of Bastards

Section 60. Penalty for removing mother of bastard; how supported after removal.

61. Mother and child poor persons; proceedings against

county or town from which she was removed.

62. Mother and bastard; how to be supported.

63. Mother and child not to be removed without her

consent.

64. Overseers to notify superintendents of cases of bastardy; when county chargeable.

65. Duty of superintendents to provide for mother and

child.

Section 66. Until taken charge of by superintendents, to be supported by overseers.

67. Overseers of towns to support bastard and mother,

whether chargeable or not.

"

68. Moneys received by overseers from parents of bastard, how applied and accounted for.

69. When moneys received on account of bastard chargeable to county; how to be disposed of.

70. Disputes concerning settlement of bastard, how determined.

71. Proceedings when bastard is chargeable to another

town.

72. Mode of ascertaining sum to be allowed for support of bastard.

73. When mother and child to be removed to county alms-house.

74. Compromise with father of bastard; when mother may receive money.

75. Compromise with putative fathers in New York.

§ 60. Penalty for removing mother of bastard; how supported after removal. If the mother of any bastard, or of any child likely to be born a bastard, shall be removed, brought or enticed into any county, city or town from any other county, city or town of this state, for the purpose of avoiding the charge of such bastard or child upon the county, city or town from which she shall have been brought or enticed to remove, the same penalties shall be imposed on every such person so bringing, removing or enticing such mother to remove, as are provided in the case of the fraudulent removal of a poor person. Such mother, if unable to support herself, shall be supported during her confinement and recovery therefrom, and her child shall be supported, by the county superintendents of the poor of the county where she shall be, if no provision be made by the father of such child.

In bastardy cases the mother and child are deemed paupers, and the fact that the mother or child are likely to become chargeable to the county as paupers, gives the superintendents of the poor authority to institute these proceedings. Court of Appeals, January, 1885, Neary v. Robinson, 27 Hun, 145.