1»» EFFECT OF MASTERS ORDERS. 



"work with it is done and drive it on his own purposes, the 

 master is not liable, (a) Thus, a carman, whose duty it was 

 to deliver wine and bring back empty bottles to his master's 

 warehouse, was induced to turn aside from the direct road to 

 drive a clerk home. The plaintiff was knocked down by the 

 cart when they were about two miles out of the way, and the 

 master was not found liable. (&) The deviations, however, 

 which will divest the master of liability must be such as to 

 make them separate journeys, and in all such cases this is a 

 question of degree, (c) Thus, a contractor's servant, against 

 express orders not to leave his horse or to go home for his 

 dinner, took his master's horse and cart to his home, a 

 quarter of a mile away, and left it unattended. It bolted 

 and caused injury, and it was held that a jury were justified 

 in finding the driver as acting within the scope of his employ- 

 ment. (cZ) If a servant, however, deviates materially from his 

 master's employment, and on returning to the course of it an 

 accident happens, if the return to the master's employment is 

 established, the master is liable, but not if the servant is on 

 his own errand, (e) Nor is a master liable if his servant, 

 Avithout his authority, rides some one else's horse and injury 

 ensue. (/) 



154. Effect of Master's Orders.(^) — General orders by 

 the master to a coachman not to drive when he is drunk,(A.) 

 or not to drive too fast,(i) or not to leave his van unattended,(^') 

 or not to obstruct other vehicles, (A;) will not free the master 



(a) Mitchell V. CrasweUer, 1853, 22 L..T., C.P. 100. 

 (6) Storey v. Ashton, 1869, L.R. 4 Q.B. 476. 



(c) Cockburn, C.J., in Storey, overruling Erskine, J., in Sleuth v. Wilson, sup., 

 contra. 



(d) Whatman v. Pearson, 1868, L.R. 3 CT. 422. 

 (c) Ratjnev v. Mitchell, 1877, 2 C.P.D. 357. 



(/) Goodman v. Kcnncll, 1827, 3 C. and P. 167, 



(g) See on this subject Fraser, M. and S. 282. 



(/() Willes, J., in Limpns v. Gen. Omnibus Co., 1862, 1 H. and C. 526, 539. 



(i) Cresswell, J., in Broivn v. Copley, 1844, 7 M. and G. 558, 566. 



(j) Whatman v. Pearson, 1808, L.R. 3 C.P. 422. 



(k) Livipits, cit. 



