Q. B.] are open. MACFARLANE v. NORRIS. does not or may not meet the expenditure. (Car i poses. [COCKBURN, C. J.-This is not a matter in deduction while the steamboat is used for work construction; but if it becomes necessary for the pe manent use of the dock, it will be in future rats, As to the fourth and fifth items, are these in the nu of extra capital? It is submitted that they are m. Lastly, as to the deduction in respect of rates an taxes. The net rent is that on which the assessmer. is to be made. The principle of deduction is the sta as that for depreciation. themsel no distinct charge created by the watching. The commissioners have a police jurisdiction on the river Tyne, within the limits of the port of Newcastle-onTyne (sect. 27 of Act 1852), and they have established nine police boats, one of which enters the dock each tide and rows about the dock so long as the gates The police are not paid out of the dock fund, but out of the ship and boat duty (sect. 36) and tonnage rates (sect. 34). Thirdly, with respect to the deduction of 12001. for the steamboat used for towing Welsby, in reply, was told that he need not argu the barges when filled with mud by the dredger out to to the first and second items in dispute. As sea and back. The dock is not completed, and the third item, the case disposes of that; the steamb present use of the steamboat is for forming the dock, now only used for works of construction, althongi p which increases its value, and it is now only the expen-bably hereafter it may be required for dredging diture of so much capital in forming the dock. An allowance of 4971. has been made for the towage of vessels. It is not shown that it is necessary to have this steamboat in order to earn the income of the dock. In the Southampton Dock case, where such an allowance was made, it was in the ordinary course of navigation necessary that they should have one. Fourthly, as to the deduction for 5001. cash balance. The North Staffordshire case, 30 L. J. 68, M. C., shows that that ought not to made. Fifthly, as to the deduction of 500. for stores COCKBURN, C. J.-All the questions have beta is on hand. That is objectionable. Dock stores are posed of in the course of the argument. The only charged in the claim for disbursements, and it is not of a serious character is the one for the expenses found in the case that it is necessary to have such a direction. But this case is particularly free from f supply of stores on hand. If the commissioners choose culty on that head, for the whole purpose of the tfor their own convenience to have such stores on hand, tution of the dock is of a public nature. The com they are not entitled to claim a deduction in respect sioners, of their own free will, take upon thereof. This item stands on the same footing as that the duties imposed by these Acts, without any right for the cash balance. [BLACKBURN, J.-What is remuneration; and if they take any, it would be us reasonably necessary for a tenant, is the question.] violation of the Acts. By the Assessment Act we tam Lastly, as to the deduction of the rates and taxes on to consider what rent an incoming tenant woul the gross rateable value of the dock: that is wrong. give for the docks. It is the rule, as established by The deduction should be made on the net rateable recent cases, that you must treat the imaginary tea value after the rates and taxes themselves have been as placed in precisely the same circumstances a deducted: (Rex v. Hull Docks Company, 3 B. & C. present occupier of the property. There may be cass 516.) in which the existing circumstances would not be t Manisty, A. Liddell and Bruce, for the Tyne Im-test, but in this case there is no difficulty in tha provement Commissioners.-For rating purposes, this case is to be considered as any other commercial undertaking which is going to be let to a tenant, who would make all proper deductions in estimating the rent which he should pay. [COCKBURN, J.-We are to assume that the tenant would have to manage the docks under precisely similar circumstances to the commissioners, having regard to these Acts of Parliament, and not on the footing of a commercial speculation.] (Reg. v. Fletton, 30 L. J. 89, M. C.) As to deduction. First, for expenses of direction. The commissioners may take a reasonable sum for such expenses. [CROMPTON, J.-Could turnpike trustees take money out of their trust-funds for such a purpose? Commissioners have certain statutory immunities, because they are public unpaid functionaries. BLACKBURN, J. referred to sect. 48 of the Commnissioners Clauses Act 1857, which is incorporated by sect. 5 of the Act 1850 into the Tyne Improvement Commissioners Acts.] This sum is to cover their expenses. [By the COURT.-No; this is salary.] Secondly, as to the item for watching. This is a matter for the discretion of the commissioners. They are not bound to send one of the police boats into the dock, and the dock should pay the reasonable charge for the benefit they receive from the police superintendence. [CROMPTON, J.-Sects. 30, 34 and 36 of Act 1852 supply the funds.] Thirdly, as to the deduction for the steamboat. It appears that the boat is used for dredging the dock, and is a reasonable charge upon the working expenses. [COCKBURN, C.J.The question is, whether its services are necessary in the course of the construction of the docks, or for dredging purposes?] Fourthly, as to the 500l. for cash balance. This is not claimed twice over. It is necessary to have such a balauce where the income spect, for here no tenant could come into cccupation i The rest of the COURT concurred. Tuesday, June 10. MACFARLANE v. NORRIS. Action by Scotch trustee under a sequestration-Pla of set-off. In an action by the trustee of the estate of a bir in Scotland, under a sequestration, the declaratio contained counts by which the plt. claimed for ov received by the deft. for the use of the pit, as tru after the bunkruptcy, and for interest upon my due from the deft. to the plt. as trusted after the bankruptcy; to which the deft, pleaded that, befor he had notice of the bankruptcy and before sequestration, he gave credit to the bankrupt by be coming the indorsee and holder bond fule within the Scotch law of a bill of exchange drawn by d the bunkrupt, and accepted by him, and which h became due and payable after the bankruptcy, and which credit was of a nature likely to end is from the bankrupt to the deft., and the art of - B.] MACFARLANE v. NORRIS. [Q. B. e acceptance was and is still due, and with interest | law, is not a defence in this action, inasmuch as the quals the plt.'s claim; that before notice of the right of set-off is governed by the lex fori. That even inkruptcy and before sequestration the bankrupt if the right of set-off were matter of substance and not we credit to deft. by consigning goods to him for of procedure, it is not shown that the plt.'s claim is le upon the terms that the proceeds should be re-governed by Scotch law. That the claim pleaded to itted and paid to the bankrupt in Scotland, and is a debt which is due in this country and governed by at the money sought to be recovered is the proceeds English law. That the set-off does not apply to claims the sale of the said goods under the consignment, accruing to the plt. as trustee, or accruing since the d which consignment was of a nature likely to end sequestration. a a debt from the deft. to the bankrupt, and the eft. offered to set-off the amount due to him as inorsee and holder of the bill against the claim of e plt., as he was entitled to do by the law of Scotland: d, a good plea. This The deft. contended that the Scotch law of set-off does not apply. Dr. Phillimore, Q. C. (Aspland with him) for the plt. in support of the demurrer.-The Scotch law of set-off does not apply in England. The law of a country where a contract is to be enforced must govern was an action by the plt. as trustee of the the enforcement of such contract: (Don v. Leppman, te and effects of John Park, a bankrupt, in Scot-5 Cl. & Fin. 13, 17, 20.) All matters relating to the d, under a sequestration of the estate and effects of limitation of suit are to be governed by the lex fori: said John Park against the d.ft.-first, for money (Leroux v. Brown, 12 C. B. 823; Scotch Bankruptcy rable by the deft. to the plt. as such trustee, for Act, 2 & 3 Vict. c. 41, s. 49, 78; Story on the Conods sold and delivered by the said John Park before flict of Laws, Jurisdiction and Remedy, c. 14, s. 575; bankruptcy, and the said sequestration; second, 2 Kent's Com. 602; Guilt v. Howard, 2 New Hampmoney received for the use of the said Johnshire Rep. 296; (a) Burrough v. Moss, 10 B. & C. rk; third, for money paid; fourth, for interest; 558; 12 & 13 Vict. c. 106, s. 171; Christian on th, on an account stated; sixth, for money Bankruptcy; 5 Anne, c. 17, s. 7; Bank of Galliopolis ceived by deft. for the use of the plt. as trustee after v. Trimble, 6 Munroe's App. Cas., Kentucky, 601; e bankruptcy; seventh, for interest upon money 2 Evans, note on Potier 112, m. 13; 19 & 20 Vict. me from deft. to plt. as trustee after the bankruptcy, c. 79, s. 73.) ad on an account stated after the bankruptcy between t. as trustee and deft. F. M. White, contra, cited 12 & 13 Vict. c. 106, s. 171; Allen v. Kemble, 6 Moo. P. C. C. 314; Story's Conflict of Laws, 575, note; Bliss v. Houghton, New Hampshire Rep.; Harrison v. Edmonds, 12 Vermont Rep. 648; Roscoe on Evidence; Lodge v. Phelps, 1 Johnson's New York Rep. case 139; Ory v. Lister, 4 Martin's Louisiana Rep. N. S. 277; Potier traité des Obligations, part 3, chap. 4, s. 2, art 626, “ Compensation;" Williams v. Wheeler, Kain's Principles of Equity, 560. 66 Dr. Phillimore in reply: (1 Shaw's edit. of Bell's Commentaries, 592; Chitty on Bills of Ex. 172; Story 314.) Fourth plea, as to the sum of 3117. 17s. 6d., part f the moneys claimed in the sixth and seventh counts, hat before he had notice that the said John Park had ecome bankrupt, and before any sequestration of the state and effects of the said John Park, the deft. gave redit to the said John Park by becoming the indorsee nd holder bona fide within the meaning of the Scotch aw of a bill of exchange drawn by Mousley and Co. pon the said John Park for the sum of 300/., and .ccepted by the said John Park, and which said bill ecame due and payable according to the tenor and ffect thereof, after the said John Park had become COCKBURN, C.J.-I am of opinion that our judgbankrupt, and which credit so given by the deft. to the ment should be for the deft. After considering the aid John Park as aforesaid, was a credit of a nature circumstances of this case, I think that there having ikely to end in a debt from the said John Park to the been mutual credits between the deft. and the bankleft., and the amount of the said acceptance was at the rupt, the plt. as trustee under the Scotch bankruptcy ime of the commencement of this suit, and still is, due to is only entitled to recover the amount of the balance the deft., and, together with interest thereon, equals due after the sum due on the other side has been the plt.'s claim to which this plea is pleaded. allowed to be set off. It is only by the intervention of That before deft. had notice that the said John Park the law that the deft. acquires the right of set-off; had become bankrupt, and before any sequestration to but, however this may be is immaterial, because my the estate and effects of the said John Park, the said view is determined by the Scotch law, by which acJohn Park gave credit to the deft. by consigning goods cording to these pleadings it would appear that a plt. to him for sale for the said John Park, and upon the is only entitled to recover the balance after deductterms that the proceeds should be remitted and paid ing the amount of set-off. We should be shocked to the said John Park, in Scotland; and that the money if we found that a man was not entitled to his sought to be recovered by the plt. in the said sixth undoubted rights because the proceedings were comand seventh counts in the declaration, was the pro-menced here. This plea is substantially a plea of setceeds of such money arising from the sale of the said goods under and according to the terms of the said consignment, and which said consignment was of a nature or likely to end in a debt from the deft. to the Said John Park. And the deft. says that he is ready and willing, and hereby offers to set off the amount so due to him the deft. as indorsee and holder of the said bill of exchange as aforesaid, against the claim of the plt. in respect of the matter herein pleaded to, and that by the law of Scotland he is entitled so to do, and such set-off forms an answer to so much of the plt.'s claim as this plea is pleaded to. Demurrer and joinder in demurrer. The plt.'s points were, that the fourth plea is bad in substance. That it shows no set-off or other defence good under English law, and is not founded on any provisions of the statutes relating to bankrupts in Scotland. That a set-off, valid only under a foreign off-in form it amounts to that; there are mutual credits, and the result is, that on those credits the bankrupt would have been entitled, and the plt. is now so entitled as trustee under his bankruptcy to recover only a certain balance. The plea might and ought to have set out the state of the Scotch law, but the offer made by the court to the deft. to amend his plea in that respect was declined. Taking, therefore, the effect to be as I have stated, wherever mutual credits are established, the deft. can only be held liable for the balance due; I think, therefore, this plea is good, quite independent of the other question. WIGHTMAN, J.-The question here is quite separate from the English bankrupt law. The plt., by the sixth count, claims for money received by the deft. not to be found in the libraries of any of the Inns of (a) These reports are in the British Museum, they are Court. for the use of the plt. as trustee after the bankruptcy, on the 14th Dec., whereupon the party who cizine and by the seventh for interest upon money due from the order of justices (Mr. Ripley) gare Mr. Pasa the deft. to the plt. as trustee after the bankruptcy; notice, Dec. 20, that he abandoned the justies and the deft., by his plea, says, that before he had ficate made under sect. 85, and that no appa notice of the bankruptcy and before the seques- would be made to the quarter sessions for is er tration he gave credit to the bankrupt by ment. The quarter sessions were held on the vi becoming the indorsee and holder bona fide Dec., and the appeal was entered and placed within the meaning of the Scotch law of a bill of usual list of appeals. The list of appeals was pa exchange drawn by A. upon the bankrupt, and through in the usual order, and no one appr accepted by him, and which bill became due and pay- when this appeal was called on it was struck of i able after the bankruptcy, and which credit was a the list. Afterwards, during the same day, an 17 credit of a nature likely to end in a debt for the bank-tion was made to reinstate the appeal, and for rupt to the deft., and the amount of the acceptance was and is still due and with interest equal to the plt.'s claim; that before notice of the bankruptcy and before sequestration the bankrupt gave credit to deft. by consigning goods to him for sale upon the terms that the proceeds should be remitted and paid to the bankrupt in Scotland, and that the money sought to be recovered is the proceeds of the sale of the said goods under the consignment, and which consignment was of a nature likely to end in a debt from deft. to the bankrupt, and the deft. offers to set-off the amount due to him as indorsee and holder of the bill against the claim of the plt., as he avers he is entitled to do by the law of Scotland. Now, what under these circumstances is the plt. entitled to get? It would seem that the same rule applies to Scotch trustees as to English assignees, viz., that they are only entitled to recover the balance due to the bankrupt's estate. On that short ground it seems to me that the deft. is entitled to our judgment. BLACKBURN, J.-I am of the same opinion; all depends upon the meaning of the later averments in the plea. An imperial statute recognises the trustee of the estate and effects of a bankrupt, and entitles him to sue; what rights were vested in him depends upon the Scotch law, and ought to be set out. Now, when we have, as here, mutual credits, we must see what would be the effect of the Scotch transfer, and I cannot read this averment at the end in any way than as a declaration that the Scotch law has the effect of transferring the balance due. I so construe it, that by the Scotch law the original claim is subject to the deduction here claimed; if so, the plea is good. I may add that I am authorised by my brother Crompton, who heard the argument of the case, to say he concurs in this judgment. Judgment for deft. Ashurst, Son and Morris, 6, Old Jewry, plt.'s attorneys. Thursday, June 12, REG. v. JUSTICES OF YORKSHIRE (WEST RIDING). Order for diverting a highway-4 & 5 Will. 4, c. 50, 88. 85, 90- -Appeal against-Costs. After notice of appeal against an order of justices, for diverting a highway, the party obtaining the order served the app. with notice that he abandoned the certificate of justices, and would not apply to the quarter sessions for its enrolment. The appeal was entered and called on in its turn by the court of quarter sessions, and struck out, no one appearing. Afterwards, during the day, a motion was made and refused for the app.'s costs: Held, that nevertheless by sect. 90 the app. was entitled to, and that the quarter sessions ought to have made, the order for his costs. for the app.'s costs. This was opposed, and the cart declined to reinstate the appeal or make any ororiz costs. It was now contended that the court of que sessions acted quite right, and that the case was like cru Nisi Prius, where neither party appeared when the e was called on, and that it was in the discretion of ta court of quarter sessions to refuse to make any r for costs. CROMPTON, J.-By sect. 90 of 5 & 6 WIL 4: 50, the court of quarter sessions is bound to awrib the party giving or receiving notice of appea costs or expenses as shall be incurred in prosecting resisting such appeal, whether the same shall be ried or not. The parties might claim their costs whether appeal has been heard or not. Then why might they ca as well apply half-an-hour afterwards? The right in costs did not arise in this case until it was ascertained whether the appeal had been heard or not. WIGHTMAN, J.-The app. might apply for his costs at any time during the day. Campbell Foster, in support of the rule, was called on. Rule abst COURT OF COMMON BENCH Reported by DANIEL THOMAS EVANS and W. MAD, E Barristers-at-Law. June 5 and 6. Ex parte MATTHEW BREDEN. Articled clerk-Enrolment of articles nunc pr tunc-Stamp. The applicant had been managing clerk to an at who died, leaving a widow and young son, who t not carry on the business, and he carried it a the name of an attorney for their benefit. Tim so soon as he became an attorney, gare applicost, a consideration of his zeal, fidelity and ability, is 5ticles, and the widow promised to pay the duty, and so he was bound to the son. He was obliged to continue in the service, and he recand in the constant belief that the widow would per her promise by paying the stamp duty. At 1985 he ascertained that the widow could not p stamp duty, he obtained money and memorated in Lords of the Treasury, who granted permissus " stamp the articles on payment of a penility " 401., and they were stamped and enrolled mortingly. On application that the articles be enrolled in court, nunc pro tunc, and service be computer ma their date: Held, that the applicant being thoroughly emp and having accounted for his omission to pr stamp duty at the proper time, by stating relied on a promise that the money would be: him by the widow, and had gone on is the seTracy 2 the belief that the promise would be performe articles might be enrolled nunc pro tunc, and and be computed from their date. Maule showed cause against a rule nisi to enter an appeal by continuances, and to make such order for costs as by law required. An order was made by justices of Bradford on the 31st Oct. 1861 for In this case a motion had been made in the Q& diverting a highway pursuant to the 5 & 6 Will. 4, on behalf of the applicant, who is the articled c e. 50, s. 85, and the necessary documents lodged with an attorney, that the service of his articles might the clerk of the peace on the 2nd Nov. Subsequently from the day of their execution, upon a state of a r. Pearson, a party interested, gave notice of appeal disclosed in affidavits, and the court (dubitante Cou C. B.] CHURCHWARDENS OF ST. NICHOLAS v. CHURCHWARDENS OF ST. BOTOLPH. [C. B. rn, C. J.) had refused the application: (see Ex parte | he obtained the money and satisfied the Treasury. reden, 6 L. T. Rep. N. S. 455, Q. B.) Nearly two years before the term of his service expired he satisfied the claims of the Treasury, and he now makes this application. He is stated to be thoroughly competent, and, being of the age of forty-two, delay is of more consequence than it would be to a younger man. Some of these facts were not before the judges of the Court of Q. B. We have conferred with them since the application, and, under the circumstances above stated, that court concurs with us, and we grant the application. Application granted. 66 Francis Norton, 10, Clifford's-inn, applicant's Friday, June 6. THE CHURCHWARDENS OF ST. NICHOLAS, ROCHESTER (apps.) v. THE CHURCHWARDENS OF ST. BOTOLPH, BISHOPSGATE (resps.) Apprenticeship under an Act of 1 Geo. 2-Indenture not executed by apprentice (a pauper boy)—Indenture invalid. M. Chambers now moved in this court, upon By sect. 18 of 1 Geo. 2, c. 20, it is enacted that the The pauper boy was bound by an indenture of Held, that this indenture was invalid, inasmuch as it was not executed by the pauper boy, and also because he was beyond the age specified by the Act, and therefore that no settlement could be acquired by service, and inhabiting in the parish of Rochester. The following case was stated for the opinion of the court: June 6.-ERLE, C. J.-In this case the Court of Q. B. refused to allow the affidavit of the execution of the articles to be enrolled nunc pro tunc, and service to commence from the date of the articles. After reading the affidavit then before that court, we beg leave to say that we concur in the reasons for their refusal as expressed by my brother Crompton. The Legislature has required the courts to see that many conditions tending to secure skill and respectability in attorneys have been complied with; among others, to see that the stamp duty on articles of clerkship has been paid. As to this payment the Treasury has a duty in respect of the revenue, but, beyond that, the judges have a duty to see that the money has been paid, or to take care that the delay is accounted for, before they grant such an application as the present. In this case the applicant in the Q. B. accounted for his omission because he relied on a promise that the money would be found for him, and had gone on in the service in the belief that the promise would have been performed. As a general rule, this could not be accepted as sufficient. But the further affidavits show that the applicant had been deprived of the money, which was fairly his right, by an emergency which we may most justly say was unforeseen by him. He had been the managing clerk of an attorney, who died, leaving a widow and 2. Afterwards, on the 5th July in the same year, a young son, who could not take up the busi- the Queen, by letters patent, granted the said hosness and carry it on; and he gave his ser-pital, with its possessions and endowments, to the vices to them and their friends to keep the business said mayor and commonalty. 1. It appears from an entry on the close roll 14th May, in the 17 Eliz., that the citizens of Canterbury, being greatly charged to sustain the poor living and resorting there, were desirous of obtaining the revenues of the Poor Priests' Hospital hereinafter mentioned, for the use of the poor in the city, to be employed for their sustentation and relief, as to the mayor and commonalty should seem expedient; and one Blaze Winter, the master of the said hospital, with the consent of the patron and of the dean and chapter, accordingly surrendered the hospital hereinafter mentioned, and its possessions and endowments, to the Queen, upon express trust that she should grant them out to the mayor and commonalty of Canterbury. entitled together, and has succeeded in doing so. The son, as 3. By an Act of Parliament of the 1 Geo. 2, c. 20, soon as he was admitted an attorney, gave him his An Act for erecting a workhouse in the articles, and the widow promised to pay the stamp city of Canterbury, for employing and maintaining the duty, and so the applicant was bound to the son. He poor there and for better enlightening the streets of the has thus been obliged to continue in the service, and he said city," it was enacted that there should be a states that he was in the constant belief that the widow corporation within the said city, to consist of a mayor, would perform her promise; when that belief failed, recorder and justices of the peace of the said city and C. B.] CHURCHWARDENS OF ST. NICHOLAS v. CHURCHWARDENS OF ST. BOTOLPH, the powers of the said Act, but a part of the in county of the same for the time being, and twenty- 8. A bond from the guardians to the mater commonalty was duly given shortly after the d the Act, as required by sect. 18. In the year 152. blue-coat boys were educated and lodged in the pro of the hospital set apart for them, but took their in common with the other poor in the said working. The whole building comprising the hospital was an monly called and known as "The Workhouse.” 9. From the time of the passing of the Act t year 1859, the receipt of all the moneys arising in the rents and profits of the said hospital, &c., ani receipt of the moneys raised by rates for the main ance of the poor of the said city were all entered a tenance and apprenticing of the poor blue-cont boys, and for the maintenance and apprenticing of the other pr boys of the said city, were made generally out monies as received, and no accounts exist shown; specially what portions of the money were expedal for the benefit of the said sixteen poor blue-coat iets or for the other purposes of the Act. 10. The said guardians kept and maintained the sixteen poor boys called blue-coat boys and the de poor of the said city, and discharged and pathe various liabilities imposed upon the said guardians by the said Act. The poor-law auditor has, since the year 1849, audited the whole of these accounts. Str the year 1849 the accounts of the rents from the sid lands and tenements have been kept separate, and by different officers, those of the lands and tenements being kept by the receiver, and those relating to poor by the clerk of the poor-law guardians. 4. Sect. 13 of the said Act recites the grant by Queen Elizabeth before mentioned, as follows: "And whereas, Elizabeth, Queen of England, had granted unto the mayor and commonalty of the said city of Canterbury and their successors for ever, the hospital for poor priests within the said city, and other lands and tenements to the said hospital appertaining, which hospital, &c., had been ever since held and enjoyed by said mayor and commonalty for the time being, and had been by them made use of, and the rents and profits thereof applied and disposed of towards the maintenance and lodging of several poor boys of the said city, commonly called blue-one book, and the disbursements made for the matcoat boys," and then enacted that "the said hospital, &c., as well within the said city, as in the county of Kent, should be settled and vested in the guardians of the poor of the said city, thereby constituted and made a corporation, upon trust that the several guardians of the poor of the said city should employ the said hospital, &c., for the benefit and advantage, maintenance and employment of the poor of the said city intended to be provided for, maintained and employed by the said corporation thereby erected, and as would best answer that end and purpose." And it was also enacted by sect. 16, "that the said guardians should provide a good and sufficient house of correction to and for the use of the said city, in lieu of the hospital, a part of which had been formerly used as a house of correction for the said city, and one or more masters of the same." And it was by sect. 18 of the said Act further enacted, "that the said guardians of the poor should give bond under their common seal, for themselves and their successors for ever, thereafter to provide for, clothe and maintain sixteen poor boys of the said city to be called blue-coat boys, and furnish them with all manner of necessaries and an apartment by themselves, separate from the other poor in the said hospital, and cause the said sixteen boys to be instructed in reading, writing and accounts, and put them and every of them respectively out apprentices after they and every of them respectively should have attained their respective ages of thirteen years, and before their said ages of fifteen years, and pay with every such boy so to be put out apprentice the sum of 57. at least, which said sixteen poor boys should be nominated, elected and appointed by the said mayor and commonalty of the said city, and as often as there should be any vacancy by death or putting out apprentice of any one or more of the said sixteen boys or by any other means, the said mayor and commonalty of the said city and their successors should nominate and appoint other poor boy or boys of the said city to supply such vacancy." 11. The rents and profits arising from the n and hereditaments, so granted to the corporatie Queen Elizabeth, have always been more than cient for the maintenance, educating and apprenti the blue-coat boys; and, at the time of apprentic the pauper, the said rents and profits amounted to yearly sum of 500l. and upwards. The s 1 Geo. 2, c. 20, is to be considered as incorporated in and forming part of this case. 12. Charles Drury, the pauper, was duly noticed and elected one of the said blue-coat boys, and tained and educated, in pursuance of the s up to the time of his apprenticeship, mentioned. 13. By indenture of apprenticeship, dated the April 1821, and bearing a 17. stamp, under the mon seal of the said guardians, and executed Samuel Paris, of the city of Rochester, earning it is witnessed that the said guardians, by virte in pursuance of the powers to them given in t the said Act 1 Geo. 2, put out, placed and boud said Charles Drury, a poor blue-coat bor, then in workhouse of the said city, and an inhabitant t parish of St. Margaret, in the said city, apprenti the said Samuel Paris, with him to dwell and s from the 9th of the said month of April, for years. 5. By sect. 25 of the said Act it is enacted that the said guardians of the poor should take care and provide for the maintenance of all the poor of the fourteen parishes mentioned in the Act, and by sect. 26 power is given to the said guardians to employ the And, by the same indenture, the said S poor of the said city; and by indenture, under their Paris, in consideration of 201. paid by common seal, to bind any poor child of the said city or guardians, covenanted to teach the said apprentice parishes, after such child shall have attained the age trade of a cordwainer, and to provide for the st of fifteen or sooner, provided such child be not bound apprentice so that he were not anyways a charge to for a longer time than that mentioned in this section. 6. By sect. 20 power is given to the said guardians to make rates for maintaining the poor, for building a workhouse and house of correction, and for the other purposes in the Act mentioned. said parish of St. Margaret or city of Canter 14. The said Charles Drury, at the time 7. No workhouse was built by the guardians under quired by 56 Geo. 3, c. 139, nor was any order t T |