Local Government in Ancient India c9.19

c9.19

own son, and treat and feed him as such. He should teach him whole-heartedly and honestly. The master was competent to make him do the work strictly related to the craft he was learning, but was not competent to exploit his labour or skill by employing it for purposes unconnected with it. While making him work thus, he should not treat the apprentice like a hired labourer but like a son, with due tenderness and affection. Equally strict were the obligations under which the apprentice was bound to his master. If through the master’s efficient training he attains proficiency in the craft before the expiry of the period stipulated for in the indenture, he was not competent to leave the master but had to serve out his full term, cheerfully yielding to him the fruits of his labour as the reward or compensation for the saving of time effected by the superior skill of the master in teaching. Yājñavalkya (II. 187)¹ states the same condition thus: ‘Even if an apprentice has learnt the art (within the prescribed time) he must live in the house of his master for the full period of contract. (The student, desirous of learning an