THE COURT. This is no settlement upon the face of it; there must be a hiring for a year; and that cannot be dispensed with. 1 Sess. Cas. 156.

So also in the K. v. Newton, Mic. 14 Geo. 2, the pauper was on Wednesday after Martinmas-day, being the 14th day of November, and the day on which the first statute for the public hiring of servants was held at Knaresborough, hired to to serve from that time till Martinmas-day following; which service he accordingly performed.-By Lee Ch. J. This can never be supported to be a settlement, for there was neither a hiring for a year, nor a service for a year. Burrow's Sett.

Cas. 157.

So also in the K. v. 'Lowther, Hil. 11 Geo. 3, the pauper hired herself as a servant in the parish of Lowther, from Whit suntide to Martinmas; and before the expiration of that term. hired herself again for the succeeding half year from the said Martinmas to the Whitsuntide following; and in pursuance o these hirings, served in the said parish of Lowther, for the complete year without leaving her service; and received the tw half-years' wages. The usual custom of hiring servants i Cumberland is from half-year to half-year. And it had bee the invariable practice of the quarter-sessions of Cumberland as long as could be remembered, to adjudge the said hiring fo two successive half-years,and service in pursuance thereof for on whole year with the same person, and in the same place, to be settlement under the several acts of parliament relating to the set tlement of the poor.-It was moved to quash the order of ses sions, confirming the order of removal to Lowther; and th counsel who was to have shewn that there was a settlemen there acknowledged that the orders could not be supported there being no hiring for a year. Burrow's Sett. Cas. 674.

ΟΙ

So in the K. v. Harwood, Tr. 20 Geo. 3, the pauper wen to the market-town of Otley, where there is a custom for ser vants to hire by the year, at two different Statutes; one hel on the Friday before Old Martinmas-day; the other on the Fr day next after Old Martinmas-day; at which latter Fair they always hire till the Old Martinmas-day following, whic by the custom is considered as a hiring for a year. Martinmas-day 1774, was on the Tuesday; and on th Friday following, being the second Statute-Fair, the pa per hired himself to serve a person in Harwood, till the O Martinmas-day following; which person he according! served in Harwood till the Old Martinmas-day following.-Th being a hiring for three days less than a year, THE COURT We clearly of opinion, that this was not a sufficient hiring for year; and Buller J. observed, That there is no case in which hiring, which must necessarily be less than a year, has been a judged to give a settlement, and it would be dangerous to mal a new precedent of that sort; all the cases agree, that there mu be a hiring for a year. Caldecot's Cas. 100.

So in the K. v. Ackley, Ea. 29 Geo. 3, the pauper, on S

turday, 13th October 1787, being three days after Old Mi. delmas-day, which happened on a Wednesday, was hired to aperson of Ackley, to serve him until the next Michaelmas He accordingly went into such service, and continued there'n Saturday the 11th of October 1788, being the day after Old Michalmas-day, which (it being Leap-year) happened on a Friary, and was paid his wages and went away. As this was

a service of 365 days, the sessions thonght it gained him a setlement in Ackley, and confirmed the order of removal, by which he and his wife were removed from Bicester to Ackley.-BUT THE COURT were clearly of opinion, that here was no hiring for a year. It is stated, that the pauper, three days after Michaelmas, contracted to serve till the Michaelmas following; this was therefore a hiring for two days short of a year. And though this court has been extremely indulgent in determining that services which have been in point of fact less than a year, shall be sufficient to confer a settlement, as where the pauper has been absent with leave, or the like; yet they have been_always strict in regard to the contract of hiring. 3 Term Rep.

950.

So also in the K. v. Mursley, Ea. 27 Geo. 3, the pauper, three days after Michaelmas 1732, was hired by one Pollard, in the parish of Mursley, to serve him in husbandry until the Michaelmas following: he served him the whole of that time, and received the whole of his wages. Pollard, at the time of hiring him, told him he should not belong to the parish. The sions stated, that they were of opinion that all such transins on the part of the muster, to prevent servants gaining lements, are fraudulent; and adjudged, that the paugained a settlement in Mursley by such hiring and service -sapport of the order of sessions, it was contended, that thesessions had found this hiring to be fraudulent, this Court ld not adjudge it not to be fraudulent. And that even if they could, this case would not warrant a different conclusion; because the master hired the pauper in such a manner as to endeavour to defeat his settlement.-But by Ashhurst J. This a very clear case. It is stated as a naked fact, that the pau was hired three days after Michaelmas. It does not appear to have been a concerted scheme between the parties to prevent the pauper's gaining a settlement, for it does not appear that they ever saw each other till the actual time of hiring, which was three days after Michaelmas. This, therefore, cannot be taken to be a hiring for a year.-Buller J. There it be, by some means or other, an hiring for a year, and a rice for a year, in order to give the servant a settlement. The tion of fraud only arises where in truth, there is such a hir, that the parties endeavour to colour it in order to prevent pauper's gaining a settlement. In such case the court may my fraudulent, For suppose the master had hired the three days after Michaelmus, to serve till the Michaelfollowing, and had agreed with the servant that he should

give in three days after the expiration of that time, that would be construed to be an hiring and service for a year. But the master may if he please, hire a servant for a less time than a year, for the express purpose of preventing his gaining a set.. tlement.--Grose J. If the opinion of the court of sessions amount to any thing, it goes the length of saying, that all hirings for less than a year are fraudulent. It must be admitted, that a master may hire a servant for six months only; and the same reason will equally permit him to hire a servant for a year short of three days. 1 Term Rep. 694.

But a hiring for a customary year, as from Whitsuntide to Whitsuntide, such hiring being intended for a year, and so considered by the parties, is a good hiring for a year, although it falls short of 365 days.... Thus in the K. v. Newstead, Tr. 10 Geo. 3, the pauper hired herself at Whitsuntide 1767, to an inhabitant and housekeeper in the parish of Holy Island, to serve him for a year, from the said Whitsuntide till the Whitsuntide following, which she served accordingly. It was usual in this country,to hire servants fromWhitsuntide to Whitsuntide; and an hiring and service from Whitsuntide to Whitsuntide had always by the contracting parties been deemed a year's service; and agreeable thereto, the master had always paid a full year's wages for such service, to the servant, without any diminution thereof or addition thereto, and without making any distinction or difference, whether the space of time between the one Whitsuntide and the other consisted of more or less than 365 days. However, it appearing in this case, that the space of time between Whitsuntide 1767 and Whitsuntide 1768 consisted of less than 365 days, and was not a complete year, it was insisted that no settlement was gained by this hiring and service.---But THE COURT were unanimous that the pauper gained a settlement in Holy Island, under this hiring and service.---This is stated to be the usual way of hiring servants in this country, and that such service is always deemed to be a year's service. It is also stated as a hiring to serve for a year, though it is indeed added from Whitsuntide to Whitsuntide. But parish officers are to be appointed in Easter week, or within one month after Easter (which is a moveable feast), and they are considered as executing the office a whole year, though it may fall short of 365 days. There is no case that proves the absolute necessity that the hiring should be exactly 365 days. Burrow's Sett. Cas. 669.

So where a pauper, being legally settled in Ulverstone, and being an unmarried woman, was hired to a person residing at Hawkeshead, to serve him from Whitsuntide 1796, to Whitsuntide 1797, and she accordingly entered into his service on the Saturday after Whitsunday (being 21st May 1796), and continued to serve him in Hawkeshead till the Thursday before the following Whitsunday (being the 1st of June 1797), when the master discharged her, she being pregnant of a bastard child, of which she was delivered on the 1st of July fol

lowing...It was contended (on the order of two justices) for the removal of the pauper from Hawkeshead to Ulerstone, her rst settlement, and the order of sessions confirming the same, being removed into the court of King's Bench), that the hir ing having been according to the ecclesiastical division of the year, the parties ought to be holden to the same term of service in order to acquire a settlement, though it might happen as in this case, to be more than 365 days. BUT BY THE COURT, the case is too plain for argument; the only question is, whether a service for more than 365 days is not a service for a year ? the term ecclesiastical year is altogether new, and was never before applied to this subject. The K. v. Ulerstone, Ea. Ter. 38 Geo. 3. 7 Ter. Rep. 564.

So if the pauper be hired at a fair held the day immediately after Old Michaelmas, to serve till the Old Michaelmas-day following; this will be a sufficient hiring for a year, for the days shall be taken inclusively. Thus in the K. v. Navestock, Mt. 13 Geo. 3, the pauper at a statute fair, did on the day ext after Old Michaelmas day, viz. on the 11th of October 1780. let himself to a person of Navestock to serve until the Michaelmas following Old Style, at the wages of 10%.; the paper entered on said service, and continued in it until the Old Michadmas.day following; on which day he received his wages and quitted the said service; it appeared to be according to the atom and usage of the country to hire a servant at the tule fair, viz, the day after Old Michaelmas-day, in the manwhich this pauper was hired. And the sessions therewere of opinion, that the pauper had by the hiring and rice above stated, gained a settlement.-It was argued, that thered until was a word of exclusion, and that therefore thewa to hiring for a year, it was a day short of a year.-But by lord Mansfield and the Court. There must be a hiring for year. It has been determined, that a hiring from a moveabe feast to another feast is a sufficient hiring, being according to tom of the country, although there should not be 365 on the other hand, a hiring two days after Michaelmas he best Michaelmas, has been determined no good hiring; and therefore the question is, Whether here was a hiring for a ! Great criticism has been made on the word till; it may ay Bot be exclusive, according to the subject matter. Here custom is very material to explain it; the custom is to hire the next day after Michaelmas. If this be wrong, there Late a settlement gained in this part of the country by a How have the parties construed this hiring? it is certhey have construed it a hiring for a year. and want a place till the day after Michaelmas. His serced at end till then. The parties concluded it as a hiring Bag Michaelmas-day, for the pauper was actually in the on Michaelmas-day. 2 Bott, Const's ed. 395. Bur

ram's Sett. Cas. 719.

The servant

So in the K, 1. Syderstone cum Bermer, Ea, 17 Geo. 3.

K

On Old Michaelmas-day 1771, one Carrington of Milehar asked the pauper if he would live with him, and upon wha terms. The pauper asked eight guineas, which Carrington r fused to give; but offered him six pounds, which the pauper r fused to accept. Upon this they parted. On the next de

(being the 11th of October) between two and three o'clock i the afternoon, Carrington and the pauper were together at house in Mileham, when Carrington asked him, Whether would take the wages he had offered, which the pauper aga refused; but after some conversation, let himself to Carringto as a servant in husbandry, until the Michaelmas following, seven pounds wages: and entered upon the service on evening of that day, and staid there until the 10th of Octol following. On which day Carrington, not having finis harvest, asked the pauper to stay and help him up with harvest; and though he thought himself at liberty to go, pauper did stay with him until the next day, being the 11t October at noon; and after he had dined asked Curring for his wages whereupon he was paid the 77. and quitted master's service, and did not ask or receive any recompence for additional service.-It was contended that this was not st eient to gain a settlement.—But by lord Mansfield(without he ing the other side). There must be a hiring for a year; this is one. Though he were hired on the afternoon of eleventh, yet we shall say, that he was hired at twelve o'c at night on the 10th; for it is settled, that the law will allow a fraction of a day. He served till the tenth; that a year. If a man is born on the 10th he is of age on the The other judges concurred. Caldecot's Cases, 19.

So in the K. v. Skiplum, Mic. 27 Geo. 3, the husband of pauper having gained a settlement at Skiplam on the day after Old Martinmas-day, hired himself to a person Nawton, to serve him from thenceforth until the Old Ma mas-day following. He entered into the service a few after such hiring, and served him in Nawton pursuant t to, until the Old Martinmas day following, on which about twelve o'clock at noon he received his full wages, left his master's house on the evening of the same day.hurst J. It is much to be lamented that there is so confusion in settlement cases; therefore whatever latest determinations may be, they ought to be adhere Now the last case, namely, that of the K. N. Syders seems to correspond with the present in every point. that a distinction had been made, as where the hiring and vice had been expressly found to be for a year, accordi the custom of the country. But in the last case, no su tinction was taken: so here there is no custom stated "until" must be taken to be inclusive. Therefore there biring and service for a year; for the pauper's husband e into the service the first day of one year, and served till t instant of the next.-Buller J. The only question is, W Martinmas day is to be taken inclusive or exclusive ?