case the king against gately a order of session to discharge a apprentice from  his master virtual discharge the master from the covenant of the indenture S c  salk S c comb S c Carth S c Sett Rem the session under the Elizabeth c modern  er p can discharge a apprentice from his master if not bind to one of the  trade mention in the statute S c salk Mod vent sand comb say quaere and see  note a page the order abovementioned be remove into the court of king bench by  a certiorari several exception be take to quash it first the order be that the  servant shall be discharge from his master but the master be not discharge  from his covenant to the servant therefore the order be not mutual be void  modern to which it be answer that it be not necessary it shall be mutual for  when the servant be discharge the other be no long a master second the statute  Elizabeth c never intend to give the justice ill session a general power to  meddle with master in all trade but only in such which be then use in England  and therein particular mention and it provide that if such master which must  be one of those trade shall misuse his apprentice then the justice may  interpose but a surgeon be not name in that Act and it be a penal law it shall  not be extend accord to equity to comprehend any other trade but what be  express name in the Act this objection be thus answer videlicet that a surgeon  be a trade within the statute for it be a manual occupation and that be  particular mention in the Act but it have be hold that this statute extend to  more trade than those mention ill it for the apprentice of a merchant have be  discharge from his master by a order of session and yet a merchant be not name  in that Act beside it be not a penal but a remedial law to regulate master and  apprentice see king v collingburne mich term Geo where on a order of session  to discharge a apprentice from the trade of a glazier it be contend that the  session have no authority because this be a trade not mention in the Act but  the court say that although it be doubt whether the statute Elizabeth c extend  to all trade it have of late be settle and agree that it do stram S c ld ray a  three the justice of peace have no authority to discharge a apprentice but  where he be compel by they to serve and in such case it be reasonable that the  contract which be make by their authority shall be dissolve by the same power  but they can discharge any voluntary agreement make between the party if they  make all order for the payment of servant wage it be good because they have  power to compel the service king v pope post b but for the wage of a coachman  or the like they have no power to make a order because they can compel a mali  to serve in that capacity Jones comb Mod salk c one Reycroft a justice of  peace in Middlesex make a order for the payment of a seaman wage and upon a  action bring against he the plaintiff recover thirty pound damage viner Abr pl  d fourthly but if the justice of peace have any power they have not pursue it  for it do not appear that they who set their hand and seal to the discharge be  present in session and at the examination of the matter it be only set forth  in the order that the justice of the peace of the county who modern hand and  seal be thereunto set c and those may be justice act out of session afterward  it be move again this order be quash for the second and three exception take  to it