Citation: TOWNSHIP OF FALLOWFIELD v. MARLBOROUGH TOWNSHIP, 1 U.S. 28 (1776)
Background
The case involved a dispute over the removal of a pauper, James Heany, from the Township of Fallowfield to the Township of Marlborough. The order for removal was issued by the sessions court, and exceptions were taken to the proceedings below.
Overview
The central issue was whether the pauper, James Heany, had been properly examined before the removal order was issued. The plaintiff, Township of Fallowfield, argued that the removal order was invalid because it did not appear that Heany had been examined, nor was any reason provided for why he was not examined.
Issues of the Case
Whether the removal order was valid without an examination of the pauper.
Whether natural justice required the pauper to be heard before removal.
Court
The case was heard by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania during its April Term in 1776.
Parties to the Case
Plaintiff: Township of Fallowfield
Defendant: Township of Marlborough
Judgment
The court ruled in favor of the defendant, Township of Marlborough. The court held that it was not necessary for the examination of the pauper to appear on the face of the order. The court stated that justices were not obliged to set forth evidence or every little circumstance, and that when nothing appeared to be wrong, the court would make an intendment in favor of their order. The order of sessions was confirmed, with costs awarded to the defendant