The King against The Inhabitants of Chipping Warden
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 26 January 1799 |
| Date | 26 January 1799 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 101 E.R. 1293
IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH.
1 East, 59, 73.
ST. E. 109, THE KING 'V. CHIPPING' WARDEN 1293 the king against the inhabitants or chipping warden. Saturday, Jan. 26th, 1799. An apprentice agreed with' his master'to purchase the rest of his time, and that, the indentures should remain with the" master till payment of the sum stipulated, part of which onljr wa's paid: before the expiration of the time, he served another man, at the recommendation of his original master, above 40 days; this was holden to enure as a service under the indentures. [1 East, 59, 73.] Two justices, by an order, removed E. Lymath, Ann his wife, and their five children by name, from the parish of Chipping Warden, in the county of Northampton, to the parish of Great Eobright, in the .county of Oxford. Upon appeal, the sessions quashed the order, subject to the opinion of this Court on the following case : the pauper, B. Lymath, was born in the parish of Brailes, and, in 1776, was bound apprentice, by indentures, to W. Goodwin, blacksmith, of the parish of Great Eobright, for the term of five years. He continued in the service of Goodwin, at Eobright, for two years and a half under the said indentures, when his master left off business, and went to reside in the parish of Marston. At that time the pauper agreed verbally with his master, that he (the pauper) should give him 71. for the rest of his time, his master not wishing to turn him over to any one; and it was agreed that the master should keep the indentures in his custody till the 71. was paid, which was to be discharged from time to time, as' the pauper could earn it, and could make it convenient to pay it. The -pauper considered himself at liberty to work with any master he pleased, and did work with different masters until the harvest of 1779,. when, at the request of his former master, Goodwin, he came to serve him as a labourer for about a month, and received his wages according to the rate usually given to labourers in the time of harvest; the amount being deducted from the 71. which the pauper had agreed to pay to Goodwin. Goodwin afterwards recommended the pauper to serve one Cherry, a blacksmith, in Marston, into whose service he went with the knowledge of Goodwin, and continued therein about twelve months. The indentures were not delivered up until five or six years after the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
The King against The Inhabitants of St. Martin's Exeter
...afterwards, with the knowledge and at the recommendation of his master, went into the service of another person ; Rex v. Chipping Warden (8 T. R. 108). Rex v. Christowe (11 East, 95), supports the principle of that case. In Rex v. Hiiidringham (6 T. K. 557), though the apprentice had, with ......
- The King against The Inhabitants of Crediton
-
The King against The Inhabitants of Gwinear
...There was no intention of giving up the indenture unless the money was paid. The case is very like that of Sex v. Chipping fiParden (8 T. R. 108). It is not material to consider whether there was an effectual dissolution after the agreement. There can be no doubt that after the agreement th......
-
Thomas Hawkshaw, Plaintiff; William Parkins and John Thompson, Defendants
...a decision, that a covenant not to sue one of several co-obligors is not, at law, a release of the co-obligors. (Dean v. Nev-haU, 8 T. R. 108. Huttrm v. Eyre,, ( Taunt. 289.) That may introduce, a question, whether such a covenant is not a release in equity. " His Lordship doth order, that ......