LIVERY-STABLE KEEPER. 



237 



Owner held liable in Quarman 



V. Bm-nett 253 



Wearbig the Hirer'' s Livery . . id. 

 A Job-Master's Affreement . . . , 254 

 Where the Hirer is liable for 



Damage id. 



Hirer liable through his own 



Conduct id. 



Hirer liable ivh ere he might have 



controlled his Servant id. 



M'Laughlin v. Pryor 255 



Opinion of the Court of Com- 

 mon Pleas id. 



The General Rule 256 



Where the Hirer ivould not be 

 liable id. 



Hirer sitting outside liable . . id. 

 The Jurg must decide whether 



the Servant is acting for the 



Hirer or Oicner 257 



A Hirer's Agreement id. 



BoKEOwiNG Horses. 



Lending for Use 258 



Duties of Borrower and Lender . id. 



Lender of a Horse id. 



Must not conceal Defects id. 



What Care is requited , . 258 



As much as the Borrower is 



capable of bestowing 259 



Showing a Horse for Sale id. 



A gratuitous Bailee 260 



Negligence of a Bailee id. 



Rule as to Negligence of gra- 

 tuitous Bailee id. 



Use stricthj personal id. 



Cannot be used by a Servant . . 261 

 Must be used according to the 



Lending id. 



Or else the Borrower is an- 

 swerable id. 



Where no Time is fixed for 



Return id. 



Redelivery on Request id. 



Borrower bound to feed the 



Horse id. 



Where the Horse is exhausted . . 262 

 Where the Horse is killed .... id. 

 Where the Horse dies from 



Disease id. 



Where Borrower is answerable 



for Damage id. 



Bailment ended by Misuser .... id. 



LIVERY-STABLE KEEPER. 



A Livery-stahle Keeper, who is not an Innkeeper, has no 

 privilege himself, and none can be claimed under him ; he 

 must therefore rest on his own agreement {a). But he is 

 not liable to the inconveniences to which Innkeepers are 

 subject, such as taking out Licences, &c. ; and he is not 

 bound to have Soldiers quartered upon him {b). 



But if a Horse in his keeping be lost or stolen, he is 

 answerable for it {c). 



A person should satisfy himself of the credit and solvency 

 of the LiDery-stahle Keeper, to whom he proposes to entrust 

 his Horse ; because Horses and Carriages standing at 

 Livery are diatrainahle for rent {e). 



But the case of a Horse sent to a Livery-stable merely 

 to be cleaned and fed, is very different from one, where he 



(«) Yelv. 66 ; Chapman v. Allen, 

 Cro. Car. 271 ; Yorlcc\. Greenaugh, 

 2 Ld. Raym. 687; S. C. 1 Salk. 

 388 ; Gelly v. Clerk, Cro. Jac. 188. 

 la some of tlie States in America 

 statutes are in force giving the 

 livery-stable keeper a lien upon 

 animals for their keei). See Hanover 

 on Horses; Colquit v. Jiirkman, 47 



Ga. 555 (1873). 



{b) Rarkhurst v. Foster, 1 Salk. 

 387 ; Barnard v. How, 1 C. & P. 

 366. 



(c) Yorke v. Greenaugh, 2 Ld. 

 Raym. 866 ; Francis v. Wyatt, 3 

 Burr. 1498 ; S. C. 1 Bla. Rep. 485; 

 Parsons v. Gingcll, 4 C. B. 558 ; 

 S. C. 16 L. J., C. P. 227. 



Has no pri- 

 vilege. 



Liable where 

 the Horse is 

 lost. 



Horse at 

 Livery dis- 

 trainable. 



But not 

 where he is 

 merely to be 

 cleaned and 

 fed. 



