BAILMENT 271 



should be demanded would be less than where the 

 animals were loaned for the use of the bailee, free 

 of charge. Midway between these would be the 

 case in which the animals are hired out for the 

 mutual benefit of both; the bailee gets the use of 

 the animals, and the bailor receives pay for their 

 service. Where an animal is loaned free for the use 

 of the bailee, the highest degree of care and dili- 

 gence to insure the safe return will be demanded 

 of the bailee in law, and if injury results because 

 of his slight negligence he will be held strictly 

 to account therefor.^ But when as an accommo- 

 dation to the owner a man assumes the care of his 

 stock, and expects nothing in return for his labor, 

 and perhaps pasture, the law will presume only 

 the exercise of a slight degree of diligence, and 

 will hold him for damages only when they are the 

 result of his gross carelessness or negligence.^ 

 When the bailee either hires the use of the ani- 

 mals, or takes the animals to care for, the court 

 will only expect him to use such ordinary care as 

 he would were they his own; and will hold him 

 responsible only for ordinary negligence. 



A man driving along an open country road 

 might permit the horse to take his own way much 

 of the time without being negligent ; but the same 

 horse must be driven with a guiding rein through 

 a crowded city street. A sound horse may be 

 driven with less guidance than one which is known 



2 Howard v. Babcock, 21 111. v. Harlow, 31 Ga. 348; Bass v. 

 259; Robertson v. Brown, 1 U. Cantor, 123 Ind. 444, 24 N. E. 

 C. Q. B. 345. 147; Wolseheid v. Thome, 76 



3 Line v. Mills, 12 Ind. App. Mich. 265, 43 N. W. 12. 

 100, 39 N. E. 870; Thompson 



