HIRING HORSES. 251 



there lias been no actual conversion of the property, but 

 only an offer to sell ; therefore the prisoner must be ac- 

 quitted {u). 



If the Owner parts with the possession of a Horse for a Must have 

 sjjecial purpose, and the bailee, when that purpose is exe- ^^^ ^ta^ken 

 cuted, neglects to return it, and afterwards disposes of it ; -vvith a felo- 

 if he had not a felonious intention when he originally took nious inten- 

 it, his subsequent withholding and disposing of it will not, ^g^ law^"^" 

 at common law, constitute a new felonious taking, or make 

 him guilty of Felony {x). 



But these questions will not now arise in cases of the Now bailee 

 kind just referred to, as by 24 & 25 Yict. c. 96, s. 3 (//), j^^°*f ^^^^'^ 

 the fraudulent appropriation of property by bailees is 2I & 2.5 Vict. 

 declared to be Larceny, and may be the subject of an in- c. 96. 

 dictment for Larceny. 



Of course a person is liable to pay for Horses used by Horse hired 

 himself and hired on his behalf by his servant. Thus, if ^ ^ servan . 

 a coachman go in his master's livery, and hire Horses 

 which his master uses, the master will be bound to pay 

 for the hire of the Horses, though he has agreed with the 

 coachman that he will pay him a large salary to provide 

 Horses, unless the person letting the Horses had some 

 Notice that the coachman hired them on his own account, 

 and not for his master (s) ; for wherever one of two in- 

 nocent persons must suffer by the acts of a third, he who 

 has enabled such third person to occasion the loss, must 

 sustain it («). 



In general the Owner of a Horse is liable for any acci- Owner's lia- 

 dent which may befall it when fairly used by the IT/r^r (h). ^Si^enr 

 Thus, where a Carriage is let for hire, and it breaks down 

 on the journey, the person who lets it is liable, and not the 

 Hirer (c) ; unless it breaks down through some act of the 

 Hirer, which is not within the Contract {d). And we 

 shall see in a variety of cases, what are the circumstances 

 under which Owners have been held liable for damage, 

 inflicted through the negligent use of Carriages or Horses 

 they have let for hire. 



((/) Beg. V. Broolis, 8 C. & P. 295. (a) Per Ashurst, J., Liclharroiv 



But see post. v. Mason, 2 T. R. 70. 



(.!■) Rex V. Banl;s, R. & Pt. 441. {])) See Arbon v. Fussell, 3 F. & 



But see post. P. lo2 ; and Holmes v. Onion, 2 C. 



iy) Founded on 20 & 21 Yict. c. B., N. S. 790. 



54, s. 4. (r) Sutton v. Temple, 12 IM. & ^Y. 



{z) Eimell v. Sampayo, 1 C. & P. 60. 



254. {(I) Lygo v. KcwboU, 23 L. J., 



Ex. 108. 



