Commonwealth v. Deacon
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
HABEAS CORPUS to the keeper of the prison of Philadelphia, to produce the body of James King, together with the cause of his detention. The return stated, that he was detained by virtue of a commitment by the Mayor of the city of Philadelphia, as the apprentice of John Preece, from whose service he had absconded.
Read the full summary
HABEAS CORPUS to the keeper of the prison of Philadelphia, to produce the body of James King, together with the cause of his detention. The return stated, that he was detained by virtue of a commitment by the Mayor of the city of Philadelphia, as the apprentice of John Preece, from whose service he had absconded. On the hearing it appeared, that, by an indenture dated the 2d September, 1816, James King, with the consent of his guardian, bound himself apprentice to John Preece, of the city of London, for the term of seven years, to learn the art of a gold beater. In the year 1819, Preece…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Tilghman, C. J.
It appears by the return to the habeas corpus in this case, that James King was committed by the Mayor of the city of Philadelphia, as an apprentice who had absconded from the service of his master, John Preece. The question, therefore, is, whether James King was the lawful apprentice of John Preece, at the time of the commitment? The indenture of apprenticeship has been produced, by which it appears, that on the 2d of September, 1816, King, with the consent of his guardian, James Wilson, (his father being dead,) bound himself apprentice…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Commonwealth v. HamiltonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1810
- Commonwealth v. EdwardsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1813