13 East, 143. Where a parish is divided into several townships or hamlets, &c., each maintaining its own poor separately, if there be no churchwardens or chapelwardens appointed for such a township or hamlet, and the churchwardens of the parish do not act as such, an indenture executed by the overseers only, or the majority of them, is deemed valid. R. v. Nantwich, 16 East, 228. But if a churchwarden or chapelwarden have been appointed for a township, hamlet, or chapelry, he is to be deemed one of the body, by the majority of whom the indenture must be executed; see R. v. Hinkley, 12 East, 361; and an execution by such churchwardens or chapelwardens shall be deemed as valid as if it were by the churchwardens of the parish, in which such township, hamlet, or chapelry is situate. 54 G. 3, c. 107, s. 2. So, if the churchwardens of the parish act as churchwardens or chapelwardens of a township, hamlet, or chapelry within it, maintaining its own poor, although sworn in only as churchwardens of the parish, and not as churchwardens or chapelwardens of the township, &c., an indenture executed by them [and the overseers of the township, hamlet, or chapelry, or the majority of them,] shall be deemed as good and valid as if they had been sworn in as churchwardens or chapelwardens of such township, hamlet, or chapelry. Id. s. 1.

By stat. 3 & 4 W. 4, c. 63, s. 2, reciting that by several acts of parliament the directors, guardians, and other officers of incorporated hundreds, parishes, and other districts, are authorized to bind poor children apprentices, and that they had bound out children by indentures, to which such directors, &c. were the binding parties, by their description of directors, &c. and had executed the same by affixing thereto their corporate seal, and reciting also that some doubts had been entertained of the validity of the indentures so executed: it was declared and enacted that all such indentures already so executed, or thereafter to be so executed, should be deemed good and valid, See R. v. Lutterworth, 3 B. & C. 487. Stat. 20 G. 3, c. 36, s. 1. The indenture of a parish apprentice differs in some respects from an indenture of apprenticeship in ordinary cases. In the first place, the parish officers, and not the child, are the binding parties, as has been already mentioned; the indenture recites that the binding is by and with the consent of the justices whose names are thereunto subscribed, and by virtue and in pursuance of an order of justices, taking care to set out the date of the order, otherwise the indenture will be void. 56 G. 3, c. 139, ss. 1, 5. R. v. Bawbergh, 2 B. & C. 222. Also annexed to the master's covenant for maintenance, there shall be a proviso to this or the like effect: "provided always, that the said last-mentioned covenant on the part of the said F. M. (the master) his executors and administrators to be done and performed, shall continue and be in force for no longer time

11

than for three calendar months next after the death of the said F. M., in case he the said F. M. shall happen to die during the continuance of such apprenticeship, according to the provisions of an act passed in the thirty-second year of the reign of King George the Third, intituled, an act for the further regulation of parish apprentices;' or if such proviso be omitted, still the covenant shall not be deemed to be binding for a longer time than three calendar months after the death. 32 G. 3, c. 57, s. 1, and sch. A. As to the other covenants and provisoes to be inserted in the indenture, see Rules 18, 19, 20, & 21, ante, p. 92, &c.

Blank forms of these indentures may be had of the publishers of this work.

As to the period for which the children may be bound: a male child shall be bound "for no longer term than till such child shall come to the age of twenty-one years;" 18 G. 3, c. 47; and a female child, till she come to the age of one

and twenty years, or the time of her marriage." 43 El. c. 2, s. 5. They may, however, be bound for a less time. R. v. Chalbury, 1 Bott, 643, 610. And even if they be bound for a longer time, see R. v. Gregory, 2 Ad. & El. 99, or for an indefinite time, R. v. Woolstanton, 1 Bott, 610, or if a female child be bound until the age of 21, without saying, or until her marriage:" R. v. St. Petrox, Burr. S. C. 248, 1 Wils. 96: in these and the like cases the indenture is not void, but voidable only.

Indenture, how allowed and executed.] By stat. 43 El. c. 2, s. 5, the binding of parish apprentices was required to be with the assent of two justices of the peace. By stat. 56 G. 3, c. 139, s. 1, the justices are directed to make a previous inquiry as to the propriety of binding the child to the party intended, and then to make an order sanctioning the binding, which has been already noticed, ante, p. 95; and "after such order shall have been made, such justices shall sign their allowance of such indenture of apprenticeship, before the same shall be executed by any of the other parties thereto." 56 G. 3, c. 139, s. 1. If the parish be within a city, borough, or town corporate, the indenture shall be allowed by two justices, one of the city, &c. the other of the county. 3 & 4 W. 4, c. 63, s. 3, This allowance is written upon the indenture, and signed and sealed by the justices. See R. v. Stoke Damerel, 7 B. & C. 563. R. v. St. Paul, Exeter, 10 B. & C. 12. And this being a judicial, and not merely a ministerial act, it must be done by the justices together; R. v. Hamstall, Ridware, 3 T. R. 380; but where it was first signed by one justice, the other not being present, and afterwards while both were present it was signed by the second, this was holden to be sufficient. R. v. Winwick, 8 T. R. 455. Where the parish is within a city, borough, or town corporate, as the indenture in that case must

be allowed by a justice of such city, &c., and a justice of the county in which the same is situate, 3 & 4 W. 4, c. 63, s. 3, supra, it should seem that the allowance in such a case may be separate, by each magistrate. The form of the allowance may be thus :

"We, whose names are hereunder written and seals affixed, justices of the peace in and for the county of · aforesaid, whereof one is of the quorum, do consent to the binding of A. B. to be an apprentice, according to the intent and meaning of this indenture: and we sign and seal this our allowance of such indenture of apprenticeship, before the same hath been executed by any of the other parties thereto. Given under our hands and seals this day of, in the year of our Lord

Also, as has already been noticed, ante, p. 89, the justices having first ascertained that the rules made by the poor-law commissioners, upon the subject of binding parish apprentices, have been complied with, shall certify the same at the foot of the indenture. 4 & 5 W. 4, c. 76, s. 61.

The above is the mode of allowance, where the child is bound to a master in the same county in which the binding parish is situate. But by stat. 56 G. 3, c. 139, s. 2, in all cases where the residence or establishment of business of the intended master shall be within a different county or jurisdiction of the peace from that in which the binding parish is situate, or wherein the justices of the latter county, &c. have not jurisdiction, the indenture must be allowed, not only by two justices of the county or district in which the binding parish is situate, but also by two justices of the county or district within ̧ which the child shall be intended to serve, such last-mentioned justices not being engaged in the same business, employment, or manufacture as the intended master. Or, if it have been or shall be allowed by two justices, acting as well for the county or district in which the binding parish is situate, as for that in which the child is intended to serve, it will be sufficient. 3 & 4 W. 4, c. 63, s. 1. Where the justices of the county in which the child was intended to serve, refused to allow it, because the master might have an apprentice from among the poor boys of his own parish, which would suit him better, an application was made to the court for a mandamus, on the ground that the justices could only inquire into the fitness of the master, and not into the propriety of the binding in other respects; but the court held that the justices had a general discretion given them by this statute to consider the propriety of the binding; and as they had exercised it, the court would not interfere. R. v. Mills et al., 2 B. & Ad. 578.

Also, by stat. 56 G. 3, c. 139, s. 2, notice shall be given to

the overseers of the poor of the parish or place in which such child shall be intended to serve an apprenticeship, before any justice of the peace for the county or district, within which such parish or place shall be, shall allow such indenture; and such notice shall be proved, before such justice shall sign such indenture, unless one of such overseers shall attend such justice and admit such notice. And this has been holden to extend, not only to cases where a child is apprenticed into a different county or jurisdiction from that in which the binding parish is situate, but to all cases of a binding out of the parish or township; and therefore, if a child be bound as a parish apprentice by the parish or township of A., to a master in the parish or township of B., a previous notice must be given to the overseers of B., although A. and B. be within the same county, and the same justices have jurisdiction in both. Threlkeld, 4 B. & Ad. 229.

R. v.

The allowance by the two justices of the county in which the child is to serve, is in the same form as that by the justices of the county in which the binding parish is situate, as given ante, p. 100, except that in this case, and indeed in all where previous notice to the overseer is requisite, it is usual, after stating the consent, to allege the notice thus: "it having been proved upon oath before us [or admitted before us by the overseers of the said parish of B.] that due notice in writing has been given by the overseers of the poor of the parish of A. to the overseers of the poor of parish of B. of such binding being intended;" and we sign and seal, &c.

Allowance, in what cases, where the parish is not party to the indenture.] By the same statute (56 G. 3, c. 139, s. 11,) after reciting that the salutary provisions of stat. 43 El. c. 2, are frequently evaded in the binding out of poor children, and the premium of apprenticeship, or a part thereof, is clandestinely provided by parish officers, who are thus enabled to bind out such poor children without the sanction of justices of the peace, it is enacted that "no indenture of apprenticeship, by reason of which any expense whatever shall at any time be incurred by the public parochial funds, shall be valid and effectual, unless approved of by two justices of the peace, under their hands and seals, according to the provisions of the said Act and of this Act." The allowance in this case must be under seal, or the indenture will be void; R. v. Stoke Damarel, 7 B. & C. 563; but the allowance under the first section of the statute, ante, p. 99, need not be under seal, R. v. St. Paul, Exeter, 10 B. & C. 12, although in practice it is so, and it may be prudent to continue that practice.

The "public parochial funds" mentioned in the above section, mean either funds contributed by the parishioners generally, or funds applicable to the general purposes of the relief

of the poor, and not funds contributed by individuals for a specific purpose, such as a devise of lands or bequest of money, for the purpose of putting out poor children apprentice or the like. R. v. Halesworth, 3 B. & Ad. 717; and see R. v. St. Peter's, Hereford, 1 B. & Ad. 960. And even where in such a case, the overseer also furnished the boy with a full suit of clothes, out of the parochial funds, which would not all have been given, but in prospect of his being bound, but no stipulation to that effect had been made with the master: the court held that the clothes were not an expense incurred by the public parochial funds, within the meaning of the statute; and Parke, J., said that the expense so incurred must be such as to make it a case of binding directly or indirectly by the parish officers. R. v. Quainton, 1 Ad. & E. 133. But where, before the execution of the indenture, the master said that the pauper should have some better clothes; and the boy thereupon went to the parish officers, who agreed to give him for that purpose 21., on the execution of the indenture, and 21. more at the end of the year; the overseers were present at the execution of the indentures, and were attesting witnesses to it, and at the same time they paid the master's wife 21., who laid them out in clothes for the pauper, and the remaining 21. they paid to the pauper at the end of the year: the court held this to be a case within the meaning of the act; the money was laid out by reason of the indenture, for the master, before he would take the apprentice, required it to be so laid out; and as the money was paid by the parish officers, it must be presumed to have been paid out of the parish funds. R. v. Mattishall, 8 B. & C. 733. Where the apprentice was 21 years of age at the time of the binding, the court held it not to be a case within the statute, as that relates to the apprenticing of children only. R. v. St. John, Bedwardine, 5 B. & Ad. 169.

As to the putting out of apprentices where money has been bequeathed or given for that purpose, see stat. 7 Jac. 1, c. 3.

Defects in the binding, allowance, &c.] "No settlement shall be gained by any child, who shall be bound by the officers of any parish, township, or place, by reason of such apprenticeship, unless such order shall be made, and such allowances of such indenture of apprenticeship shall be signed, as hereinbefore directed." 56 G. 3, c. 139, s. 5. See ante, p. 95.

And by sect. 6, in case any overseer shall bind an apprentice to any person, without having obtained such order and such allowances as herein before required, and in case any person shall receive any such apprentice, as so bound, without such order and allowances having been first obtained, the said overseer and the said person shall each respectively forfeit the