Local Government in Ancient India c9.23

c9.23

art), as he has received his board from the teacher, must make over to the latter the fruits of his labour (during the period of his pupilage).' Here Yājñavalkya justifies the master's appropriation of the results of all work done by his pupil during his apprenticeship as a sort of compensation for the expenses he incurs in giving him free board, and lodging. The master was also empowered to compel the return of a runaway apprentice, whom he could flog or confine for his disobedience, provided such disobedience or desertion was not by way of protest against any mortal sin or other heinous crime committed by the master. This is no doubt a characteristically Hindu provision securing the moral purity of craftsmen to which modern industrial legislation is hardly sufficiently attentive. There is again another provision for the payment by the master to the pupil of a salary adequate to his proficiency if he desired to retain his services, in which case the first claim upon his services belongs to his master.