Charles A. Turner, Kt., C.J.
1. The object of the Act was to provide a remedy for fraudulent breaches of contract by workmen, artificers or labourers, who have received advances of money for work they have undertaken to perform or get performed, such persons being, from want of means, ordinarily unable to make compensation when sued for damages. As the Act applies to cases in which the workman has undertaken to get work performed, as well as to cases in which he undertakes personally to perform it, there may be cases in which a contractor is liable to proceedings under the Act; but the Court agrees with the District Magistrate that the contractor must be himself a workman, and the evidence warranted the District Magistrate in finding in this case that accused, whose ordinary business is that of a contracting bricklayer, and who does not himself work, was not a workman within the meaning of the Act with reference to the contract for earthwork, which is the subject of the proceedings.
2. The Court will, therefore, not interfere.