R. v. Inh. of the apprentice as proposed: this order is, by the statute, made the warrant to the officers for the binding, and it must be referred to in the indenture by its date and the names of the justices; 3dly, the signature of the allowance of the indenture by the justices after the order made, and before the execution of the indenture by any of the other parties thereto. These directions apply to every case of every binding, without regard to the jurisdiction within which the master's parish may be situate; and they are followed by a proviso applicable to them, not containing any general regulation as to the binding of an apprentice to be employed in another county, but prohibiting a binding for employment in another county at a greater distance than forty miles from the parish to which the apprentice belongs, unless such parish be more than forty miles from London; in which latter case the justices, on a binding to a distance exceeding forty miles, are to make a special order specifying the grounds on which they think fit to allow a binding to the greater distance. Thus far, all the enactments regard only the justices of the county to which the apprentice belongs; and whether we attend to the comprising of the whole in one numbered section, or disregard that circumstance and attend only to the order and disposition of the sentences, which is the more correct mode of reading an act of parliament, the effect will be the same. I come now to the second class, which, as before observed, I consider to be placed together in and printed as the second section of the act. By this section it is further enacted, "that in all cases where the residence or establishment of business of the person to whom any child shall be bound, shall be within a different county or jurisdiction of the peace from that within which the place by the officers whereof such child shall be bound, shall be situate; and in all other cases, where the justices of the peace for the district or place within which the place, by the officers whereof such child shall be bound, shall be situate, and who shall sign the allowance of the indenture by which such child shall be bound, shall not have jurisdiction, every indenture by which such child shall be bound, at any time after the said first day of October, shall be allowed as well by two justices of the peace for the county or district within which the place, by the officers of which such child shall be bound, shall be situate, as by two justices of the peace for the county or district within which the place shall be situate wherein such child shall be intended to serve." This is an enactment: the sentence that immediately follows begins with the word "provided," a word properly applicable to qualify some antecedent matter. I think the enactment plainly requires a twofold allowance, and by two distinct authorities. The words, "who shall sign the allowance of the indenture by which such child shall be bound," considering the place in which they are here introduced, convince my mind that the things required by this enactment are to be done after the allowance required, in the first instance, for the binding, and by different persons. The enactment applies to the binding into a "different county or jurisdiction of the peace." It seems to have been thought, that if those words had stood alone, a doubt might be raised whether the word "jurisdiction" would apply to a town or place, parcel of a county, but whose justices have a jurisdiction excluding the authority of the justices of the county wherein Trent. it is situate; and to prevent this, there is mention, as it were, of R. v. Inh. of another class of cases, viz. those wherein the justices who shall Newark-uponsign the allowance shall not have jurisdiction. It is to be observed, that bindings under this act are not of that class which is compulsory upon the master; so that, as far as regards him and his place of residence, the allowance of the binding in the first instance by the justices is not properly the exercise of a local authority. By this enactment, if it be not afterwards controlled, a twofold allowance will be requisite whensoever the master's parish and the parish of the apprentice happen to be under the general jurisdiction of different justices; and the second allowance must be by the justices of the local district within which the master's parish is situate, whether that parish be in the same county as the parish of the apprentice, or in a different county: if the two parishes happen to be in the same county, and the parish of the apprentice is in a local district, and that of the master in the county at large, the second allowance must be by the justices of the county. It is clear, however, that some qualification is introduced as to this matter by the third section; but before I notice that more particularly, it is fit to advert again to the second section. The part of that section following the enactment before detailed, begins, as I have observed, with the word "provided." It runs thus: "Provided always that no indenture shall be allowed by any justice of the peace for the county into which such child shall be bound, who shall be engaged in the same business, employment, or manufacture, in which the person to whom such child shall be bound, shall be employed." This proviso appears to me to relate only to those cases which form the subject of the enactment immediately preceding, as well by reason of its position in the statute, as of the expression, "into which such child shall be bound," which I consider to denote plainly a county different from that to which the child belongs, and in which the binding by the discretion of the justices is made. The following words are introduced by the conjunction "and," which is properly applicable to connect them with the preceding words, and so connecting to confine them to the cases mentioned immediately before: the following words are, "And 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." If the act had nothing further on the subject of the jurisdiction of justices, I cannot satisfy my mind that it would have been ever thought that the whole matter of this second section of the act was not confined to those cases in which an allowance of the indenture by justices of two distinct jurisdictions was required. And it seems to me, that the doubt has arisen from the matter contained in the third section of the act. This section begins also with the word "provided," and it appears to me a continuation of the second section, and a further qualification of those cases, and those alone, which form the first part of the section, viz. the cases of different jurisdictions of justices. It is in these words: "Provided R. v. Inh. of Trent. always, and it is hereby declared, that the allowance of two justices Newark-upon- of the peace for the county within which the place in which such child shall be intended to serve an apprenticeship shall be situate shall be valid and effectual, although such place may be situate in a town or liberty within which any other justices of the peace may, in other respects, have an exclusive jurisdiction." I consider this section to give the jurisdiction to the county justices, whether the town or liberty be within the county to which the master alone belongs, or the county to which both the master and the apprentice belong, but to give it only as it regards the master's parish; so that if a child belonging to a town or liberty is to be bound to a master residing out of the town or liberty, the enquiry in the first instance as to the fitness of the proposed master and the order for the binding, and the first allowance of the indenture, must be by the justices of the town or liberty: and applying this section to the case now before the court, I think the question is the same as it would be if the town of Newark had no local justices. And then the question will be, whether upon a binding to a master residing in the county to which the child belongs, notice of the binding must be given to the overseers of the master's parish. I have already observed upon the order in which this clause requiring notice stands in the act, and its connexion by the copulative "and" with the sentence next before it, and have said, that I consider that sentence, also, as relating only to the justices of what I may call the second jurisdiction. If it had been intended that notice should be given to the overseers of the master's parish in all cases, I cannot forbear thinking, that this would have been effected by some distinct enactment, and not by words immediately following and connected in language with an enactment regarding certain cases only. I cannot say that I have found any reason for thus expressly requiring the notice to the parish officers, where the binding is into another county, which may not be urged with almost equal force to a binding in the same county. But it is to be observed, that the legislature has, in the first section, expressly directed the justices of the apprentice's county to enquire into the fitness of the proposed master and the distance of his residence; and I presume it was thought, that where the discharge of this prescribed duty should appear to the justices to require a notice to the officers of the master's parish, they would require such notice to be given, whereas no special duty is imposed by the act on the justices of the master's county; and, as I construe the act, there is a special qualification respecting. those justices in regard to their business or manufacture; and the notice may therefore have been required in this case, as well for the purpose of supplying the place of that enquiry which is enjoined in the other, as for security against the allowance of the indenture by any justice of the same business as the master. I think, also, that if such an intention had been entertained by the legislature, the sentence requiring notice would have contained some words denoting that the notice was to be given, whether the master's parish was in the same county as the apprentice's, or in a different county; and if the master's parish was in the same county, then that the notice should be given before making the order for the binding, which is the important act, and not merely before the allowance of the indenture, which is only a ministerial act, as it respects the justices who have made the order; R. v. Inhabitfor I think it cannot have been intended that the same justices ants of Newarkshould make an enquiry, and then an order for the binding, and upon-Trent. afterwards give an opportunity for the officers of another parish to attend before them, who might induce them to rescind their order. If notice to such officers and proof thereof were to be required, I think they ought to be required in the first instance, and before making the order. If the notice is confined to the allowance of the indenture by the justices of another county, it is required before any act is to be done by them. The notice is certainly required only with reference to an allowance of the indenture by the justices of the master's county. If it is required where that county happens to be the same as the county of the apprentice, then, as I have before observed, it will be required before an allowance by the binding justices in some cases and not in others, and this will not be distinctly shown by the statute; whereas, according to my construction of the statute, the several matters required of the justices of the two distinct jurisdictions will be detailed in a plain and intelligible order, without any confusion of arrangement or perplexity of language. For these reasons, I am of opinion that the notice is not required where the apprentice and his master reside in the same county. The statute upon which the question has arisen is certainly not free from ambiguity. I have already noticed, that if its requisitions are not complied with, a settlement cannot be gained, under circumstances in which it might have been gained before the passing of the act; and I have thought myself bound to decide upon that which I deem to be the true sense and meaning of the words of the statute, regard being had to the order and arrangement of its matter; and I have the satisfaction of knowing, that if my construction be erroneous, the error is of no practical importance, because the opinion of my learned brothers must prevail, and the rule for quashing the order of sessions must be made absolute.- Order of sessions quashed. 56 G. 3. c. 139. Distance to which apprentices may be bound not to be which are coun Stat. 56 G. 3. c. 139. § 4. "And whereas there are several cities and boroughs which are counties of themselves, and several districts situated without the limits of the county to which such districts respectively belong; be it enacted, that the distance to which parish apprentices may be bound shall not be construed to be limited to such cities and boroughs being counties, but shall extend to the county in which any such city and borough, ties of themand any such district, though belonging to another county, shall be locally situated." § 5. "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 herein-before directed." (a) §6. "In case any overseer or overseers shall bind an apprentice to any person or persons without having obtained such order and such allowances as herein-before required, and in case any person or persons shall receive any such apprentice as so bound, without such order and allowances having been first obtained, the said overseer or overseers, and the said person or persons, shall (a) See R. v. Bawbergh, ante, p. 116. (note.) limited to cities selves. No settlement shall be gained unless direcwith. tions complied. Penalty on overseers binding apprentices contrary hereto. 56 G. 3. c. 139. each respectively forfeit the sum of 10. for each apprentice so bound, to be recovered as the penalties herein-after given are directed to be recovered." Age. be bound until In cases of al, &c. how the parish where two justices of county, who shall inquire, &c. and make § 7. "After the said 1st day of October, it shall not be lawful for any parish officers to bind out any child as parish apprentice until such child shall have attained the age of nine years.' §8. "If any person or persons to whom any child shall be bound apprentice by the overseers of the poor of any parish or master's remov- place, shall after the said 1st day of October remove his, her, or their residence or establishment of business out of the same county, or forty miles from the parish or place wherein the same was when such child was bound apprentice, such person or persons shall, at least fourteen days previous to such removal, give a written notice thereof to the churchwardens or overseers of the poor of the place where such apprentice shall then reside, unless such person or persons shall reside in such place under certificate; and in that case such persons shall give the like notice to the churchwardens or overseers of the poor of the place where such apprentice shall then be legally settled; and which churchwardens and overseers, and also the master or masters, mistress or mistresses of such apprentice, shall cause such apprentice to appear before two of H. M.'s justices of the peace for the county or district within which such apprentice shall be then serving, who shall enquire whether it may be fit and proper that such apprentice should continue in the service of such person or persons, or be discharged therefrom, or bound or assigned over to any other person or persons, and shall thereupon make order (E), either for the continuance of such apprentice with such person or persons, or for the discharge of such apprentice, or for the binding or assigning of such apprentice to any other person, as to them in their discretion shall seem meet; and, if they shall see fit, shall also require the person or persons so giving notice of removal to pay the amount of the premium received with such apprentice, or such portion of it as to them shall seem meet, for the expense of assigning or binding such apprentice to any other person to be approved by the said justices; and the person or persons to whom such apprentice shall be so bound or assigned, shall be subject to the same rules and regulations as the person or persons to whom such apprentice shall be originally bound; and in case any such master or masters, mistress or mistresses, shall remove as aforesaid, and shall take any such apprentice to any other place, without such order as aforesaid, or shall wilfully abandon and leave any such apprentice without giving such notice as aforesaid, every person so offending shall forfeit the sum of 10. for every such apprentice, to the churchwardens and overseers of the poor of the parish, township, or place wherein, at the time of such removal or taking, the apprentice shall have been legally settled, for the use of the poor of the same parish, township, or place; provided an information shall be exhibited for such of fence within three calendar months next after the commission of the same." order for apprentice's continuance or otherwise. Indentures not valid unless approved by two justices. § 11. "And whereas the salutary provisions enacted by an act passed in the 43d year of the reign of H. M. Queen Elizabeth, intituled an act for the relief of the poor, are frequently evaded in the binding out of poor children, and the premium of apprentice |