APPRENTICE, 8 27 
and the former refolntions confined the fenfe of the fhitute and worfe. and is to provide for him in ficknefs and in 
to fuch trades only, but the latter adjudications feem to health. Str. 99. 
extend the equity thereof to other trades not mentioned in Shall repair unto one. jufiice. Upon an order made at the 
the ftatute; as in the following inltances: feflions to difcharge an apprentice, it did not appear, that 
M. 7 Will. K. and Gately. On a certiorari it was moved he applied himfelf to a jufiice firft. And Ilolt, Ch. J. was 
to qualh an order of feflions, for the difcharge of one Ed- of opinion, that the jultice hath power to make an order, 
ward Green from his apprenticefhip to the defendant Gate- and, it obeyed by the mailer, then the feflions can have no 
ly. The fail was, that Gately was a mountebank, and being power; if difobeyed, then the jultice upon complaint may 
at a place in Yorklhire, where he kept a public ftage, bind the mailer to the feflions, and that the feflions have 
Green was by indenture bound apprentice to him in this no power otherwife. i.Sal/1.67. 
manner, viz. to Robert Gately, furgeon, to learn the trade T. 13 Will. K. and Johnfon. Exception was taken to an 
he now ufeth; and immediately he went upon the ftage, order for di(charging an apprentice, that the complaint was’ 
and ever lince continued in the employ. After which, made originally at feflions, without any previous application 
being w ith bis mailer Gately in Middlefex, lie complain- to a Angle jullice out of feflions: Holt, Ch. J. delivered the 
ed to the j u dices, that his mailer did not teach him the opinion of the court, That the order was good; if it had 
trade. Upon which they difeharged him. This being done, been a new queftion, he fhould have held a prior applica- 
Green fet up the trade of mountebank himfelf. It was tion to fome jullice out of feflions neceflary ; but after lb 
moved to qualh the order, the juftices being willing, be- many orders affirmed in this court, which have been other- 
caufe they were inipofed upon. And the exception was, wife, it is too late to fettle that now. 1 Salk. S 3 . So alfo 
that the ftatute of the 5 Eliz. in difeharging apprentices is m the cafe of K. and Gill, H. 5 Geo. it was laid by the 
confined, and extends only to apprentices mentioned in court, It hath been fo often refolved, that the feflions 
that claufe. and there neither furgeon nor mountebank is hath an original iurifdiftion, that we will not fuffer it now 
mentioned: and though a furgeon may be a trade within 
the ftatute, which a man cannot exercife without ferving 
an apprenticefhip to, becaufe that claufe of the ftatute is 
general; yet this part of the ftatute, relating to the dif¬ 
charge of apprentices, extends only to trades there men¬ 
tioned. By the court: The claufe relating to the dif¬ 
charge of apprentices is general, and goes to all manner 
of apprentices, even to thole of merchants; but afterwards 
the court were of opinion, that the power of difeharging 
reaches only to the trades mentioned in the ftatute, among 
which a furgeon is not mentioned ; for that, though as to 
the ferving (even years apprenticefhip, a furgeon comes 
under the general term of arts and myfteries, yet the pow¬ 
er of difeharging reaches only to the trades particularly 
mentioned. 2 Salk. 471, 2. And M. 1 2 Anne, 0 . and Fur- 
nefe. It was held, that the ftatute extends only to the 
trades therein mentioned ; and therefore not to a glafs- 
bottle-maker. Caf. of S. 29. On the other hand, in the 
cafe of K. and Collingbourn, M. 12 Geo. Exception was 
taken to an order of difcharge, that the juftices could not 
difcharge the apprentice, becaufe the trade to which he 
was bound, viz. a glazier, was not within the ftatute : But 
not allowed; for though formerly it was held, that the 
trade ought to be a trade within the ftatute, yet the latter 
refolntions have been otherwife. L.Raym. 1410. Sir. 663. 
Shall mifufe or evil intreat his Apprentice. An apprentice 
to a furgeon was lent by his mailer to the Eaft Indies : It 
was adjudged, that the mafter cannot compel his appren¬ 
tice to go beyond the fea, except the mafter go with him; 
but he may fend him to any part of England. 13 Jac. Co¬ 
ventry and IVindall. Brozunl. 67. But otherwife, if it be 
exprefsly agreed, or the nature of the apprenticefhip doth 
import it; as if the mafter be a merchant adventurer, or 
bailor. Hobart, 134. 
Evil intreat. E. 8 Geo.II. K. and Eafman. An appren¬ 
tice was difeharged, the mafter having ufed. him unkindly, 
and refilling to provide for and entertain him : But by 
the court, this is not a good ground for the difcharge : 
for there is a power to oblige the mafter to receive and 
entertain the apprentice, and ufing him unkindly is too loofe. 
Str. 1014. 
Or the Apprentice do not his duty to his Majler. T. 4 Geo. 
K. and inhabitants of Hales Owen. An older reciting that 
Jofeph Higgin was bound out by indenture, as the ftatute 
requires, to John Parks, and being lame, and having the 
king’s evil, and in the opinion of furgeons incurable, 
therefore the juftices difcharge the mafter from his ap¬ 
prentice. It was moved to confirm the order, becaufe 
the mafter cannot now have the end of the binding, which 
was, the fervice of his apprentice. But it was aniwered, 
that the ftatute only iinpowers the juftices to difcharge 
for milbehaviour, and not for ficknefs. And qualhed by 
the court; for the mafter takes the apprentice for better 
3 
to be made a queftion, though it might be doubtful upon 
the ftatute itfeif. Str. 143. And, T. 12 Geo. K. and Davie. 
The court agreed, that it is a point not now to he difpu- 
ted, that the feflions hath an original jurifdiclion to dif¬ 
charge apprentices. Str. 704. And by Lord Hardwicke, 
Ch. J. in the cafe of K. and Eafman, E. 8 Geo. II. 'I his 
determination is right; for the application which the aft 
direfts to be made to a private jullice, feeins to mean only 
to arbitrate and accommodate the difpute. The ftatute 
fays, if he cannot compound the matter, he is to take bond 
for the parties appearance at the feflions, fo that they are 
not to take it by appeal. Cafes in the time of Lord Hard¬ 
wicke, ior. 
Or to the mayor or other head officer. M. 12 Geo. K. and 
Collingbourn. An order of feflions was made at Hicks’s 
Hall, for the difcharge of an apprentice to a freeman of 
the city of London, and w'ho was bound and inrolled there. 
And, the order being removed into the king’s bench, the 
queftion W'as, whether the court of feflions at Hicks’s Hall 
hath any jurifdiclion to difcharge an apprentice to a free¬ 
man of London (efpecially as there is a faving in the aft, 
of the cuftom of the city of London) ; or whether he 
ought not to be difeharged by the mayor’s court only. It 
appeared that the apprentice lived with his mafter out of 
the city of London, and within the jurifdiclion of the juf¬ 
tices of Middlefex. To this exception it was anfwered, 
that the ftatute doth not regard where the binding or in¬ 
rolling is, but gives the jurifdiftion exprefsly to the jus¬ 
tices where the mafter lives ; and if this did not belong 
to the juftices of Middlefex, where the mafter lives, there 
would be a failure of jullice : for neither the chamber- 
lain, nor any other city magiftrate, have power to compel 
the mailer’s appearance before them. The court affirmed 
the order of difcharge, and faid they would not take away 
the jurifdiftion of the mayor’s court, but only give a con¬ 
current jurifdiftion to the juftices for the county. And it 
would be very inconvenient, to have apprentices to a free¬ 
man of London, who are bound there, and who live in 
diftant counties, obliged to come up to the mayor’s court 
to get themfelves difeharged : and the words of the fta¬ 
tute are very plain ; for they give the jurifdiftion to the 
juftices where the majler dwellcth. Str. 66 3. 
Who J.hall by his wifdom and difcrction take fuch order and 
dircElion between the Mafler and his Apprentice as the equity of 
the cafe fttall require. Hereupon the jullice, if he fees caufe, 
may, by confent of the mafter, difcharge the apprentice 
from his apprenticefhip: but this muft not be by a verbal 
difcharge; for the apprentice being by deed, cannot be 
difeharged but by deed, that is, by order under the hand 
and feal of'the jullice. Dalt. c. 58. 6 Mod. 182. 
If for want of good conformity in the mafer. If the maf¬ 
ter is dillatisfied, he may have the matter transferred to 
the feflions: but here is not the like option given to the 
apprentice ; 
