HOWARD v. ROBINSON, 1 Del. 165 (1797)

Wilson’s Red Book, 183

Court of Quarter Sessions of Delaware.
November, 1797.

Page 165

Petition by an apprentice for a discharge.

It was admitted that the indentures had been signed and sealed by the apprentice, his mother, and master in the presence [of] John Warrington, a magistrate, and many other persons then present, and that the magistrate had interlined by consent some things beneficial to the minor and had written the names for the marksmen,[1] but had neither signed nor certified them, but had kept them in his possession until he left the county, and that then they were left with his papers in the hands of his brothers.

Wilson urged that the Act of Assembly [1 Body Laws 177] neither required a signing nor certificate by the magistrate, but only that they should be executed in his presence and with his approbation, which is admitted.

Ridgely for the apprentice was prevented by the Court.

BASSETT, C. J.

The Court consider they have no power to make a thing good that is void. And this Act says that every such instrument is void. We are of opinion the boy must be discharged.