Ford v. McVay

Citations

• 55 Ill. 119

Syllabus

<p>1. Apprentices—of a void indenture—rights of the parties—construction of the statute. An indenture of apprenticeship, which is not in conformity with the statute on that subject, is void as to the minor, but.remains binding upon the father of the minor who joined with him in its execution, and stipulated that its conditions should be performed.</p> <p>2. Same—how far the father mag avail of the services of his child. A father who is entitled to the services of his minor son, and for whom he is obliged to provide, may, at the common law, assign those services to another by contract, for a consideration to enure to himself.</p> <p>3. So where an indenture of apprenticeship was entered into by a minor, his father joining therein, stipulating that the minor was to perform certain services for a specified compensation, the father also covenanting separately that his son should do and perform what he had agreed to do on his part, it was held, that, payment being made for the services of the minor according to the terms of the agreement, a recovery could not be again had for such services in the name of the minor, on the ground the indenture was void under the statute, because, though void as to the minor, it was binding on the father, who was entitled to the services.</p> <p>4. An implied contract can not arise where there is a subsisting express contract covering the entire subject matter.</p>