The King against The Inhabitants of St. Martin's Exeter
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 28 January 1835 |
| Date | 28 January 1835 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 111 E.R. 252
IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH.
S. C. 4 N. & M. 388; 1 H. & W. 69.
[655] the king against the inhabitants of st. martin's, exeter. Wednesday, January 28th, 1835. Pauper was apprenticed to J. and W., brothers and partners. They afterwards dissolved partnership, and W. removed to a distant place. J. took another partner, and continued in the same business and shop, in the parish of St. M., where pauper served him till J. died. Pauper at that time was absent from the parish, on J.'s business ; but returned immediately afterwards, attended the funeral, and served in the shop as before. Very soon after the funeral he entered into an engagement with J.'s surviving partner, and never afterwards resided with, or had any communication with, W. The case did not state that the pauper had any communication with W. after the dissolution of partnership between him and J., or that any person was left executor to J., or administered to his effects : Held, that the pauper's service between the time of his return to St. M. and that of his contract with the surviving partner was not a service under the indentures, either to VV. or to any personal representative of J. [S. C. 4 N. & M. 388 ; 1 H. & W. 69.] On appeal against an order for the removal of John Snell and his wife from the parish of Puddington, in the county of Devon, to the parish of St. Martin, in the City of Exeter, the sessions confirmed the order, subject to the opinion of this Court on the following case. By indenture of the 28th of February 1807, the pauper John Snell was bound apprentice for seven years to John and William Mildrura, who were brothers, and carried on the business of linen-drapers in partnership, in the parish of St. Martin. He resided in their house in that parish in service under this indenture, for about fifteen months ; at the expiration of which time the partnership was dissolved. William Mildrum upon this left Exeter, and set up in business for himself at Totnes. The pauper continued to serve in the shop as usual, and to reside in St. Martin's with John Mildrum, who soon after entered into a new partnership with a Mr. Proctor. Some time afterwards John Mildrum and Proctor took a house at Tiverton, where also they opened a linen-draper's shop. John Mildrura went to reside there with his family, but continued to carry on his business in St. Martin's in partnership with Proctor. The pauper's...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
The King against The Inhabitants of Cowpen
...single shift; but, a pit going double shift, the men must work one (b) See Bex v. Shipton, 8 B. & C. 88; Rex v. St. Martin's, Exeter, 2 A. & E. 655. 1192 THE KINO V. COWPEN 5 AD. * E. 888. shift on the pay Saturdays, in order to make each shift work eleven days : that the parties hired shou......