Page 154
Mich. 6 Jac. Regis.
Taylor and Shoyl's Case.
Taylor informed upon the Statute, 5 Eliz. cap. 4. Tam pro Dom. R••ge qua•• prose, in the Exchequer: That the Defendant had used the Art and Mystery of a Brewer, &c. and averred, That Shoyl the Defendant did not exercise the Art or Mystery of a Brewer, at the time of making the Act, nor had been Apprentice 7 years, &c. The Defendant demurred in Law, upon the Informa••••on, and Judgment was given against him by the Barons. And now in this Term, upon a Writ of Errour, the Matter was argued at Sergeants Inne before the two Chief Justi∣ces: And two matters were moved.
1. One, That a Brewer is not within the said Branch of the said Act; for the words are, That it shall not be lawful to any Persons, other than such as now use lawful∣ly any Art, Mystery, or Manual Occupation, to set up or use any Art, Mistery, or Manual Occupation, except he shall have been brought up therein 7 years at least as an Apprentice. And 'twas said, That the Trade of a Brewer is not any Air, Mistery, or Manual Occupation within the said Branch, because it is easily and presently lear∣ned, and needs not 7 years Apprenticeship to learn the sam••, it being every Country Housewifes Work: And the Act of H. 8. is, That a Brewer is not a Handicraft Artificer.
2. It was moved, That the said Averment was not sufficient; for it ought to be as general, as the Exception in the Statute is.
1. To the first, it was Resolved, That the Trade of a Brewer, viz. To hold a Common Brewhouse, to sell Beer or Ale to another, is an Art and Mystery within the said Act: for in the beginning of it, it is Enacted, That no Person shall be retained for less time than a whole year in any the Services, Grafts, Mysteries, or Arts of Cloath∣ing,