Justice has power to issue his warrant on the application of the master, especially when no access can be had to the apprentice himself. (v) CHAP. II. II. RELATIVE, &c. 4. Master and If an apprentice be disobedient, he may be moderately cor- apprentice. rected by the master himself, (w) but not by any delegated party; (a) and the master is entitled to all the apprentice's earnings, however considerable, in case he should wrongfully absent himself. (y) As one of the objects of apprenticeship is correction and amelioration of morals, as well as continued instruction, the absence or other misconduct of an apprentice is no adequate ground for the master wholly discharging him, and upon the apprentice's return the master's covenant to instruct continues in full force till the end of the term, unless specially provided otherwise; (~) and which provision should be introduced. (a) But in case of robbery by an apprentice, or any continued gross misconduct, magistrates will, on the application of the master, usually discharge him from continuing liability. (b) On the other hand, an apprentice has rights and duties. He may defend his master with force. (c) If his master withhold maintenance a magistrate will enforce it; (d) magistrates at sessions may also enforce proper instruction; (e) and disputes between them may be settled, with the consent of the master, either by a single magistrate or at sessions; (f) and magistrates and a Court of Equity will, in some cases, enforce a return of premium or a just proportion.(g) If a master, by cruelty or starvation, cause the death or endanger the life of his appren (z) Winston v. Lewin, 1 Bar. & Cres. 460; 2 Dowl. & R. 465. (a) A clause might be inserted as follows," Provided always nevertheless, and it is hereby covenanted and agreed by and between the said parties, that in case the said apprentice shall at any time or times hereafter be wilfully guilty of disobedience or misconduct towards his said master, or any of his family or servants, and his said master shall give notice thereof in writing to the said E. F. (the person bound for the apprentice) then if the said apprentice shall, after the said E. F. shall have received such notice at least twentyfour hours, again be wilfully guilty of the like, or any other misconduct towards his said master, or any of his family or ser vants, then it shall be lawful for his said (b) See Burn's J. Apprentice. (d) 20 Geo. 2, c. 19; 4 Geo. 4, c. 29. (g) Id. ibid.; Chit. Eq. Dig. 74. In 5. Relation of vant, clerks, &c. tice, he may be indicted; but as there is no obligation on a married woman to provide food for an apprentice, a wife, though foro conscientiæ, perhaps, equally guilty, would not be punishable for merely withholding requisite food. (h) The relations of master and servant, and master and clerk, master and ser- materially differ from each other, and require distinct consideration. With respect to servants, they are of various descriptions. First, servants in husbandry and labourers: secondly, those in particular trades; and thirdly, menial servants. The two former are by particular statutes placed under certain salutary regulations, but unfortunately as yet magistrates have no controul over menial or domestic servants, (i) though a description of persons to whom some summary remedies and punishments might be well applied. There is one general law, however, applicable to all servants, namely, that if hired for a year, and if they have duly served during that time, they acquire a settlement in the parish in which the last forty days' service and sleeping took place; (k) and, therefore, in order to prevent a charge upon a parish in which a master resides, it has become a practice, legalized by decisions, (7) purposely to hire servants for less than a year; and sometimes leases expressly stipulate that tenants shall so hire, on purpose to avoid burthening the parish with fresh paupers. Servants, labourers, and workmen in husbandry, are placed by several statutes under the controul of magistrates, who have power to regulate their hours of work and amount of wages, and of compelling the payment, and requiring the payment in money and not in goods, and prescribing punishment for misconduct of such servants. (m) The 20 Geo. 2, c. 19, has been considered to extend to every description of labourer,(n) yet none of the acts extend to menial or domestic servants, (o) and those affording magistrates jurisdiction to decide upon the subject of wages seem only to extend to those labourers with reference to whom the justices had power to make a rate of wages; (p) nor do they extend to any case where work is done under a contract for a certain sum, or when the hours of work are entirely in the discretion of the contracting party. (q) In (h) Rex v. Ridley, 2 Campb. 650; Rex v. Friend & wife, Russ. & Ry. C. C. 20, and see Rex v. Squire & wife, 1 Russ. 16. (i) Rex v. Brampton, Cald. 11; The King v. Hullcott, 6 T. R. 585; 8 East, 113. (k) See Burn's J. tit. Poor, 318 to 423, 819. (1) Rex v. Houghton, Foley, 137; 1 Stra. 85; Burn's J. Poor, V. ninth sub division. (m) See Burn's J. tit. Servants. (n) Lowther v. East Radnor, 8 East, 113. (0) The King v. Hullcott, 6 T. R. 583. (p) Bramwell v. Penneck, 7 Bar. & Cres. 536. (q) Lancaster v.Greaves, 9 B. & C. 628; Hardy v. Ryle, Id. 603. Thus CHAP. II. II. RELATIVE, &c. 5. Master and cases of that nature magistrates cannot legally interfere, and In cases within the act 4 Geo. 4, c. 34, a magistrate cannot both commit for punishment and also discharge the servant, as he is only authorized to discharge from service in lieu of punishment.(t) Servants in husbandry are very generally hired by the year, as from Michaelmas to Michaelmas, and this is an entire hiring for a year;(u) and, unless otherwise stipulated, no wages are payable until the end of the year. (a) A master cannot, by way of correction, even moderately What correction beat his servant, or labourer in husbandry, or otherwise, as he illegal. might his child or apprentice; and if he do, the servant may lawfully depart, or obtain his discharge, by application to a justice, (y) and support an action for the battery. There is, however, an exception as to two descriptions of servants, viz. sailors (2) and soldiers, (a) allowed from the necessity of larger powers to preserve discipline and prevent mutiny. If a sailor be guilty of disobedience or disorderly conduct, the captain of a king's ship, or master of a commercial vessel employed in commerce or trade, may lawfully correct him in a reasonable manner. It is said, though incorrectly, that his authority in this respect is analogous to that of a parent over his child, or a master over his apprentice or scholar. (b) A master, on his return to this country, may be called upon by action to answer to a mariner, who has been beaten or imprisoned by him during a voyage; and, for the justification of his conduct, he should be able to show not only that there was a sufficient cause for chastisement, but also that the chastisement itself was reasonable, for otherwise the mariner may recover damages propor (r) Bramwell v. Penneck, 7 Bar. & C. 536. (s) Lancaster v. Greaves, 9 B. & C. 628. (t) Lancaster v. Greaves, Chit. Col. Stat. 874, et supra. (u) 2 Stark. R. 257; F. N. B. 168. (1) 1 Bla. Com. 425; Rex v. Whittlebury, 6 T. R. 467, per Lawrence, J. (9) 1 Bla. Com. 428; F. N. B. 168; 1 Bar. & Cres. 469. (2) Abbott on Shipping, 160. saregis Disc. 136, n. 14, cited by &c. CHAP. II. tionate to the injury received. (c) And if the master strike a II. RELATIVE, mariner without cause, or use a deadly weapon as an instrument of correction, where moderate correction might legally have been inflicted, and death ensue, he will be guilty at least of manslaughter. (d). The same principles apply to soldiers, who, however, are generally punished under sentence of a Court-Martial. 5. Master and servant. 2. Servants in trades. 3. Menial or domestic servants. Servants and workmen in particular trades are also subject to the controul of the magistrate, under several acts, some of them confined to particular trades, as the silk, cloth, woollen, linen, fustian, cotton, iron, leather, hat, lace, clock, paper, tailor, shoemaker, and other trades; (e) and disputes between master and servants in husbandry, artificers, calico printers, handicraftsmen, miners, colliers, keelmen, pitmen, and glassblowers, and other labourers in general, are regulated by several more general acts. (f) The 5 Geo. 4, c. 96, relates to arbitrations between master and workmen, and entitles either the master or workmen to demand an arbitration in certain cases; and in that case appears to be compulsory, and precludes the other party from suing. (g) The same act, and the 6 Geo. 4, c. 129, prohibit and provide punishment for combination amongst masters or workmen, and against persons for compelling journeymen to leave employment, or to return work unfinished, or to prevent them from hiring themselves, or compelling them to belong to clubs, or to pay fines, or to alter the mode of carrying on business. The 9 Geo. 4, c. 31, s. 25, makes assaults, in pursuance of any conspiracy to raise wages, punishable as a misdemeanor, with imprisonment not exceeding two years, &c.; and an assault on a seaman, keelman, or caster, to prevent them from working, subjects the offender to imprisonment for three calendar months. (h) With respect to menial or domestic servants, the terms of (c) To an action of this sort, the master must plead specially that the plaintiff committed such a particular fault, and that he corrected him moderately for it. The plaintiff, by his replication, may either deny the cause of correction, or, admitting the cause, may insist that the correction was excessive. If the master do not plead his justification specially, he will not be entitled to give in evidence under the general issue, for the purpose of mitigating damages, facts which if pleaded would have amounted to a justification. Watson v. Christie, 2 Bos. & P. 224. (d) Captain Kidd's case, 5 State Tr. 287. (e) Burn's J. Servants, 370 to 410. (f) 20 Geo. 2, c. 19; 17 Geo. 2, c. 16; 31 Geo. 2, c. 11; 6 Geo. 3, c. 25; 57 Geo. 3, c. 122; 58 Geo. 3, c. 5; 4 Geo. 4, c. 34; 10 Geo. 4, c. 52. (g) Crisp v. Banbury, 8 Bing. 394, appears applicable in principle. (h) 9 Geo. 4, c. 31, s. 26. It has recently been well suggested, that it would be highly salutary to pass an act to prevent masters from paying their servants and labourers at a usual pay-table at a public house, thereby inducing the publican to give too much credit during the week, and the men to get intoxicated when paid off, instead of taking home their money for the benefit of their families. CHAP. II. &c. 5. Master and hiring are either express or implied. It would be expedient, to prevent disputes, to reduce the terms into writing, and the II. RELATIVE, agreement need not be stamped. (i) If no terms be stipulated, it is considered a hiring, with reference to the general under- servant. standing upon the subject, that is, a continuing service, until the expiration of a month's warning given by either party, (k) or, as it has been said, until the master pay a month's wages in advance; and, unless so expressly stipulated, the servant has no right to take away livery or other clothes supplied by his master, although he be wrongfully turned away. (m) A master has no right to correct a menial or domestic ser- What correction vant, otherwise than by words and remonstrance; and if he illegal. beat him, though moderately, by way of correction, it is good ground for the servant's departure, and he might support an action against the master. (n) a master imme The rights of a master to discharge a servant in husbandry What misconbefore the expiration of the time for which he was hired, and duct authorizes that of the master of a domestic servant to discharge him imme- diately to discharge a dodiately for misconduct, appear to be governed by the same mestic menial principle, and the cases may therefore be considered together. servant. With regard to servants in husbandry, it has been considered that a master is justified in immediately dismissing him, if he disobey his orders or be guilty of other misconduct, without first going before a justice of the peace. (o) As where the master, just before the servant's usual hour of dinner, ordered him to take his horses to a small distance before he dined, and the servant refused, and afterwards did not submit, it was held that the master was justified in immediately discharging such servant, and that he could not recover any proportion of his wages. (p) So if any single female yearly servant at any time (i) See express exemption, 55 Geo. 3, c. 184, schedule Agreement. (k) Cutter v. Powell, 6 T. R. 326; Robinson v. Hendman, 3 Esp. R. 235; 2 Selw. N. P. 1032, S. C. (1) Robinson v. Hendman, 3 Esp. R. 235, and admitted by Ld. Kenyon; S. C. 2 Selw. N. P. 1032, sed quære, whether any such contract can be implied. If a servant conduct himself properly, he ought to have reasonable notice to quit; and a month's wages would be but an inadequate compensation for the loss of intermediate board and lodging. (m) 3 Car. & P. 470; and sec Id. 349. (B) 1 Bar. & Cres. 469; F. N. B. 168; 1 Bla. C. 428. (0) Spain v. Arnott, 2 Stark. R. 256; Rex v. Brampton, Cald. 11. One (p) Spain v. Arnott, 2 Stark. R. 256; 5 After argument of counsel, Lord Ellen- |