IN SEARCH OF A HORSE. 393 



or neglect, as well as to theft. A similar opinion is 

 held, though not by all the court, in the case of York 

 V. Grinstone, Salk. 388 ; and even where the owner 

 is not a guest at the inn, but only sends his servant 

 with the horse, the same rule holds good. Vide 

 Beedle v. Morris, Cro. Jas. 224. On the other hand, 

 I have already noticed the innkeeper's lien for the 

 keep of the horse confided to his care ; but even this 

 privilege is qualiified — he cannot use the horse ; vide 

 Jones V. Pearl, 1 Str. 556 ; and on the authority of 

 the same case, it appears that he cannot sell it, 

 though its keep may exceed its value. Such use, 

 however, as is necessary or proper in the way of 

 exercise, is permissible. Vide Jones on Carriers, p. 

 81. 



There is another important relation between the 

 owner and keeper of a horse which deserves notice. 

 Horses are usually turned out to graze after the 

 hunting season is over. The grazier stands in a 

 diiferent situation from the innkeeper and livery-man. 

 If the animal is stolen or injured, he is not responsi- 

 ble, unless by special agreement, except for the want 

 of reasonable care. If his fences are good, and 

 ordinary precautions are taken, he is discharged 

 34 . 



