100 irOUSE WMIUKMY. 



false stahlo key, and tlioro lias boon no nogligonco 

 Ity tlio innkoopor, it might bo held that ho was 

 not liable (r). 



There is a common idea amongst country inn- 

 koopors, that thoy may detain anyone who has 

 run up a bill at their house, but the law is 

 that an innkeeper cannot detain the person of 

 liis guest, or the guest's clothes, in order to secure 

 lunkeopor payment of his bill (-s) ; but ho may detain the 

 orhls^'*""" guest's horse or carriage for its keep, or the 

 quest's horse and carriage of another person, if brought 

 by a guest {f). Occasional absences from the inn, 

 during a long stay, will not defeat the inn- 

 keeper's lien, as, where a trainer of hoi*ses went to 

 an inn and stayed there for a long time, in fact 

 remained there while his horses were training, it 

 was held, ])y the Exchequer Chamber, that the 

 innkeeper's lion was not lost because the trainer 

 frequently took the horses for days together off 

 the premises, to attend races in different parts of 

 the country {ii). 



If, however, an innkeeper knows that a hoi-so 



(r) Mackenzie v. Cox, 9 C. & V. G32. 



(») Smibolfy. Jlford, 3 M. & W. 2J8 ; 1 R. & H. 13. 



(<) Saunders v. J'lutniner, Orl. 15ridg. 227 ; Smith v. Dearlove, 

 C C. B. 135; BOO also Tiirrillx. Cranky, 13 Q. B. 197; Snead 

 V. WatkinM, 1 C. B., N. S. 2G7 ; 26 L. J., C. P. 57; Thompson 

 V. Lacy, 3 B. & A. 283. 



(«) Allm V. Smith, 12 C. B., N. S. 638; Jiir., N. S. 230, 

 1281 ; ht'o ttlso rhrrfall v. Boruick, L. R., 7 Q. B. 711. 



