institution, it varies not only in the name, but has some other remarkable peculiarities. The companies, there called gilden, zünfte, or innungen, appear, both on account of moral and physical defects, to have refused admission to applicants for freedom, at the discretion of the elders or masters. They seem to have occasionally admitted workmen who had not served a regular apprenticeship into the lower class of members of a trade; but only those were allowed to become masters who had gone through the regular stages of instruction. The course, which continues to the present day, as follows: The apprentice, after having served the term prescribed by his indenture (aufdings-brief), is admitted into the company as a companion (gesell), which corresponds in many respects to the French compagnon. Having passed through the years of his apprenticeship, called lehrjahre, satisfactorily, he becomes entitled to receive from the masters and companions of the guild a certificate, or general letter of recommendation (kundschaft), which testifies that he has duly served his apprenticeship, and has been admitted a member of the company, and commends him to the good offices of the societies of the same craft, wherever he may apply for them. With this certificate the young artisan sets out on his travels, which often occupy several years, called wandel-jahre, supporting himself by working as a journeyman in the various towns in which he temporarily establishes himself, and availing himself of his kundschaft to procure admission into the fellowship and privileges of his brother-workmen of the same craft. On his return home, he is entitled, upon producing certificates of his good conduct during his wandel-jahre, to become a master. In Germany, the periods of servitude have varied in different states and at different periods; in general, the term is seven years; but in some instances an apprenticeship of five or three years is sufficient.

Neither in Ireland nor in Scotland have the laws relating to associated trades or apprentices been very rigorously enforced. In Ireland the same system of guilds and companies certainly existed; but, as it was the policy of the English government

to encourage settlers there, little attention was paid to their exclusive privileges: and in 1672 the lord-lieutenant and council, under authority of an Act of Parliament, issued a set of rules and regulations for all the walled towns in Ireland, by which any foreigner was allowed to become free of the guilds and fraternities of tradesmen on payment of a fire of 20s. A statute containing very similar enactments was passed in 19 George III. The term of apprenticeship, also, in Ireland, was of a moderate length, five years being required by 2 Anne, c. 4, for the linen manufacture, which, by 10 George I. c. 2, was reduced to four years. It is asserted by Adam Smith, that there is no country in Europe in which corporation laws have been so little oppressive as in Scotland. Three years are there a common term of apprenticeship even in the nicer trades, but there is no general law on the subject, the custom being different in different communities.

It is, perhaps, impossible to ascertain precisely at what time apprenticeships first came into general use in England. But that the institution is one of very old date is certain, being probably contempo raneous with the formation of the guilds or companies of tradesmen. It appears from Herbert's 'History of the Twelve Livery Companies of London,' that in 1335, when the warder's accounts of the Goldsmiths' Company begin, there were fourteen apprentices bound to members of the company. In the statutes of the realm, however, there is no reference to such an institution for about 200 years after the guilds are known to have existed, apprentices being first incidentally noticed in an act (12 Rich. II. c. 3) passed in 1388. In 1405-6 (7 Henry IV. c. 17) a statute was passed which enacted that no one shall bind his son or daughter apprentice unless he have land or rent to the value of 20s. by the year; the cause of which provision is stated to be the scarcity of labourers in husbandry, in consequence of the custom of binding children apprentices to trades. In the act (8 Henry VI. c. 11) which repealed this statute in favour of the city of London, the putting and taking of apprentices are stated to have been at that time a custom

of London time out of mind. The same statute was repealed (by 11 Henry VII. c. 11) in favour of the citizens of Norwich, and (by 12 Henry VII. c. 1) in favour of the worsted-makers of Norfolk; and in the former act we find the first mention of any particular term of servitude, the custom of the worstedshearers of Norwich being confirmed by it, which required an apprenticeship of seven years. Except in London, it does not appear that at an early period there was in England any uniform practice in this respect. but that the duration of the apprenticeship was a matter for agreement between the parties to the contract. In Madox's Formulare Anglicanum there is an indenture of apprenticeship dated in the reign of Henry IV., which is nearly in the same form as the modern instrument; and in that case the binding is to a carpenter for six years. It is, however, probable that before the statute of 5 Eliz. c. 4, the term of apprenticeship was seldom less than seven years. In London, the period of seven years at the least was expressly prescribed by the custom as the shortest term; and Sir Thomas Smith, in his Commonwealth of England, written about the time of the passing of the statute of Elizabeth, says, in reference to the previous practice, that the apprentice "serveth, some for seven or eight years, some nine or ten years, as the master and the friends of the young man shall think meet, or can agree together."

The statute of 5 & 6 Edw. VI. c. 8, which enacts that no person shall weave broad woollen-cloth, unless he has served a seven years' apprenticeship, may be adduced as a further proof that this term was fast becoming the customary one. By 5 Elizabeth, c. 4, it was declared that no person should "set up, occupy, use, or exercise any craft, mystery, or occupation, then used or occupied within the realm of England or Wales, except he should have been brought up therein seven years at the least as an apprentice." But neither by that statute nor by the customs of London and Norwich, which were excepted by the act, was a longer term of apprenticeship than seven years forbidden. The following are some of the chief provisions of the

statute of Elizabeth:-Householders who have at least half a ploughland in tillage may take any one as an apprentice above the age of ten and under eighteen, until the age of twenty-one or twenty-four as the parties may agree. Householders of the age of twenty-four in cities may take apprentices in trades for seven years, who must be sons of freemen not being labourers nor engaged in husbandry. Merchants in any city or town corporate trafficking in foreign parts, mercers, drapers, goldsmiths, ironmongers, embroiderers, or clothiers, are not to take any apprentices, except their own sons, unless their parents have 40s. freehold a year. Persons residing in market-towns, if of the age of twenty-four, may take two apprentices, who must be children of artificers, but merchants in market-towns are not to take any apprentices other than children whose parents have 31. a year freehold. In the following trades the children of persons who had no land might be taken as apprentices: smiths, wheelwrights, ploughwrights, millwrights, carpenters, rough masons, plasterers, sawyers, limeburners, brick-makers, bricklayers, tilers, slaters, healyers, tile-makers, linenweavers, turners, coopers, millers, earthen-potters, woollen-weavers, weaving housewife's or of household cloth only and none other, cloth-pillers, otherwise called tuckers or walkers, burners of ooze and woad ashes, thatchers, and shinglers. Woollen cloth-weavers, except in cities, towns corporate, or markettowns, are not to take as apprentices children whose parents were not possessed of 31. a year freehold, but they might take their own sons as apprentices: the woollen-weavers of Cumberland, Westmoreland, Lancashire, and Wales were exempted from the operation of this clause. There was a clause in the act which gave to one justice the power of imprisoning persons (minors) who refused to become apprentices. The justices were empowered to settle disputes between masters and apprentices, and could cancel the indentures. This statute of Elizabeth was repealed in 1814 by 54 Geo. III. c. 96.

The London apprentices, in early times, were an important and often a formidable

London and other places it may be done by a "turn-over." Parish apprentices may also (32 Geo. III. c. 57, s. 7), with the consent of two justices, be assigned over by indorsement on the indentures.

An indenture is determinable by the consent of all the parties to it; it is also determined by the death of the master. But it is said that the executor may bind the apprentice to another master for the remainder of his term. And if there is any covenant for maintenance, the executor is bound to discharge this as far as he has assets. In the case of a parish apprentice (32 Geo. III. c. 57, s. 1), this obligation only lasts for three months, where the apprentice-fee is not more than 57., and the indenture is then at an end, unless upon application by the widow or executor, &c. of the master, to two justices, the apprentice is ordered to serve such applicant for the remainder of the term. By the custom of London, if the master of an apprentice die, the service must be continued with the widow, if she continue to carry on the trade. In other cases it is incumbent on the executor to put the apprentice to another master of the same trade. By the Bankrupt Act, 6 Geo. IV. c. 16, s. 49, it is enacted, that the issuing of a commission against a master shall be a complete discharge of an indenture of apprenticeship; and where an apprentice-fee has been paid to the bankrupt, the Commissioners are authorized to order any sum to be paid out of the estate for the use of the apprentice which they may think reasonable. A duty on apprentices' indentures, varying with the premium, was first imposed by 8 Anne, c. 9.

A master may by law moderately chastise his apprentice for misbehaviour; but he cannot discharge him. If he has any complaint against him, or the apprentice against his master, on application of either party to the sessions, by 5 Eliz. c. 4, or to two justices in the case of a parish apprentice, by 20 Geo. II. c. 19, and other acts, a power is given to punish or to discharge the apprentice, and in some cases to fine the master. If any apprentice, whose premium does not exceed 101., run away from his master, he may be compelled (6 Geo. III. c. 25) to serve be

yond his term for the time which he absented himself, or make suitable satisfaction, or be imprisoned for three months. If he enters another person's service, his master is entitled to his earnings, and he may bring an action against any one who has enticed him away.

In London, in case of misconduct by th、 master towards the apprentice, or by the apprentice towards the master, either party may summon the other before the chamberlain, who has power to adjudicate between them, and, upon the disobedience or refractory conduct of either party, may commit the offender to Bridewell. The wardens of the different Livery Companies had formerly jurisdiction in matters of disputes between the apprentices and masters in their respective crafts; and in Herbert's 'History of the Twelve principal Companies' there is some curious information respecting regulations for apprentices, their dress, duties, &c.

We cannot fairly judge the institution of Apprenticeship, without an accurate examination of the circumstances under which it arose. That it had its uses cannot be doubted, and the continuance of the practice in this country, since it has ceased to be required by law, is some evidence in favour of the institution. Except in the case of surgeons and apothecaries, proctors, solicitors, attorneys, and notaries, there is now no apprenticeship required by law in England.

The impolicy of the old apprentice laws as they existed in France and England has been shown by many writers (Droz, Economie Politique, p. 114, &c.; Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations, book i. chap. 10). These laws and regulations were either part of the system of guilds, or were made in conformity to the objects of such system. Adam Smith says that apprenticeships were "altogether unknown to the ancients;" and "the Roman law is perfectly silent with regard to them." This may be so: but as the guilds or companies in Rome (collegia) were very numerous, it is possible that they had for their object to limit the numbers of those who should practise their several arts and mysteries; and apprenticeships might be one mode of effecting this, though it is true, as Adam Smith observes, that there appears