HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.slavery/ssactsengr0623 and id is 1 raw text is: LOCKLEY V. ELDRIDGE
MARY LOCKLEY, Widow and Executrix of JOHN LOCKLEY, and DAVID LOCKLEY,
Plaintiffs; JOHN ELDRIDGE, Defendant. [1674.]
Indentures of Apprenticeship, and a Bond decreed to be delivered up, and the Money
given to the Master to be paid back.
The Case was, David Lockley the Plaintiff was Apprentice to John Eldridge the
Defendant, and had served four Years of his said Apprenticeship; but being very
hardly used, he summoned his said Master before the Chamberlain of London, who
directed the Apprentice to sue for his Indentures to be delivered up, which he did,
before the Lord Mayor in this Court. and had a Verdict; afterwards the Defendant
offered several Exceptions in Arrest of Judgment, which being disallowed as frivolous,
the Judgment was affirmed, which was, that the said Apprentice should be discharged
from his Master, and turned over to another for the Residue of his Term; that the Master
should pay back a Moiety of £35, the Money given to put him out Apprentice, and
should provide a new Master for him, which he refusing to do, a Bill was exhibited in
this Court, that he might be discharged from his said Master, by delivering up the
Indentures [125] of Apprenticeship, and the Bond of £100 given by his Father for
his Fidelity, and the Money repaid.
The Court being satisfied, that the Apprentice was oppressed, and very ill used by
his Master, decreed that he should deliver up the Bond and the Indenture, and repay
£1 5 to the Plaintiffs with full Costs.
GEORGE LEE Merchant, Plaintiff; SARAH BOWLER Widow and Administratrix of
JOHN BOWLER, Defendant. [1674.]
Administrator of a Factor in the West-Indies decreed to account.
John Bowler, the Defendant's Son, was Apprentice to the Plaintiff, who sent him
to Virginia, and after he arrived there, the Plaintiff ordered one Whitehair who was
his principal Factor, to turn over all his Effects in his Plantation there to this Bowler,
consisting in great Quantities of Tobacco, Negroes, and other Goods; and that Bowler
was to manage the same for his Master, which were of great Value, and which together
with such Goods as were consigned to him from England, amounted to £6000 and
upwards; afterwards Bowler came to London, and being called on by the Plaintiff
to give an Account of his Factorship, he refused ; thereupon being threatned with an
Arrest, he returned towards Virginia, but died before he came thither; and after-
wards the Defendant administred to him who refuses to account, pretending that
Bowler her Son had Lease from his Master, to trade during his Apprenticeship for
himself, and that accordingly he did trade for himself, and had gained a considerable
Estate.
But the Plaintiff denying that he ever gave him Liberty to trade for himself during
the Apprenticeship, the Court decreed the Defendant to account, and afterwards to
resort back to the Court.
ELIZABETH MABLETY Widow, Plaintiff; JOHN BAKER Executor of JOHN BAKER,
Defendant. [1674.]
Executor decreed to account for Legacies, though he pretended a prior Title to the
personal Estate.
The Bill was, to have a Money Legacy of £30 and other specifick Legacies given to
her by the last Will of her late Father.
[126] The Defendant, who was Executor of John Baker the Father, pretended a
prior Title to all his Estate, by Virtue of certain Articles dated in the Year 1651, made
upon the Marriage of the Defendant, with the Sister of one Hicks, with whom he had
a considerable Portion, and in Consideration thereof, and of the said Marriage, the
Testator the Father agreed to settle and assign to the Defendant (his Son) all his Estate
and Interest in such Lands, and to leave the Defendant all such Goods of which he
should be possessed at the Time of his Death; and that the Marriage did take Effect,
REP. TEMP. FINCH, 125.](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ssactsengr0623&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)