1796
Justices of PeaceApprenticeStatuteSuspensionExpensesServiceCaptain Brenton sought to justify his detention of the apprentice John Donaldson against suspender Liddell, maintaining that Liddell had failed to comply with statutory conditions for reclaiming the boy. Liddell responded that Donaldson had not been lawfully enrolled under the 1795 act, as no written notification of disqualification had been delivered prior to the apprentice’s entry on board ship. The dispute turned on the validity of the enrollment and the statutory prerequisites for reclaiming an apprentice.AI-generated
Documents in this case (2)
- Jahleel Brenton v. James Liddell — Information, 16 Jun 1796June 16, 1796 Information of Captain Brenton, arguing that he is justified in detaining John Donaldson, an apprentice, as the suspender failed to comply with statutory conditions for reclaiming him.
- James Liddle v. Jahleel Brenton — Information, 21 Jun 1796June 21, 1796 Information of the suspender, arguing that the apprentice was not lawfully enrolled under the 1795 act because no written notification of disqualification was delivered before his entry on board a ship
People & places in this case
People involved
- John Donaldson — Party
- David Williamson Robertson Ewart, of Balgray — Advocate for Party
- Charles Hope, Lord Granton — Advocate for Party
- William Craig, Lord Craig — Lord Ordinary
