Notes for: Thomas Barrance
Cambridge Chronicle 26 Oct 1827:
COTTENHAM v. TRUMPINGTON. - This was an appeal against an order of removal, and the question for the consideration of the Court was, whether the pauper had been engaged in the service of Mr. Adams of Trumpington, under a yearly or a weekly hiring. - The pauper, Thomas Barrance, stated, that about 12 years ago he had lived with Mr. Graves, of Cottenham, for several years, being regularly hired from year to year. Since that time he had lived with Mr. Hemington, of Trumpington; and subsequently with Mr Adams, a publican, of that village. The witness said that Mr Adams asked him if he should like to live with him, and offered him two shillings a week, all the vails, and board and lodging; witness went into his service upon this agreement, and continued with him more than four years. He did not take his money weekly, but at the end of the year his master paid him £5. 4s. At the end of the fourth year, witness asked for an increase of wages, and his master told him he would give him £1 extra at the end of the year. - Mr Adams said he recollected hiring the pauper as a weekly servant; he stopped more than four years, but witness considered him as a weekly servant during the whole period. - Mr. PRYME, for the appellant, contended, that though at the first hiring the pauper might be considered as a weekly servant, yet at the end of the second and third years there was a yearly hiring, and that a hasty interruption of service was never contemplated by the parties. - The Court, however, decided that there was no hiring for a year, and confirmed the order.