Curry v. Jenkins
This text of 3 Ky. 493 (Curry v. Jenkins) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Kentucky primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The Opinion or the Court. — At the July term of the Fayette county court, an order was made, on the motion of Hamilton Jenkins, directing Curry, orphan of Nicholas Curry, deceased, to be bound as an apprentice to him to learn the mill-wright’s trade. On the same day, John Curry, by James Tracy, his next friend, moved the court to rescind the order; but the court being divided in opinion, the motion fell. A bill of exceptions was taken to the opinion of the court, which is made part of the record, from which it appears that Curry was not present when the order binding him as an apprentice was made ; nor had he, “ his guardian, next friend, or persqn in whose custody he vvas,” been summoned.
Natural justice, independent of any positive statutary provision, clearly dictates, that an orphan shemld not be condemned to servitude in his absence, and the absence of his guardian and friends. ■
The legislature, however, have provided, in the “ act concerning the poor,” passed December 19th 1793 (
This provision is not repealed, or dispensed with, by the “ act concerning guardians, infants,” &c. passed March 1st 1797
Judgment reversed.
(a) ch. 3s, § 3. p- 46, * Brad. 308.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
3 Ky. 493, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/curry-v-jenkins-kyctapp-1808.