KTf;HTS AMI I.IAHII.H'IES of INXKEKPr.US, ETC. lUl 



brouj^lit lo his inu is not tlio property of tlio per- 

 son l)rin<^in<^ it, l)ut is l)rouglit for a wrong pur- 

 pose, as, for instance, where one removed a horso 

 from the premises of a debtor to defeat a creditor's 

 claim, and put it in an inn stable, the innkeeper 

 being aware of the facts, the latter has no lien for 

 the keep or meat of the horse (.r). An innkeeper An inn- 

 lias no lien upon a horse put into his stable, ex- cannot sell 

 cept for a debt due from his guest {>/). An inn- jjorfe"^^*'^ 

 keeper should remember that if he detains a horse 

 for its meat, he cannot use it, because the deten- 

 tion is the custody of the law, and a distress can- 

 not be used by the distrainer {z). By the custom Except his 

 of the city of London an innkeeper may take London, 

 the horses of a guest who owes liim money as his 

 own, upon the reasonable appraisement of four 

 of his neighbours (^/). But now, since the Inn- or under 



1 Aiio'-i/iN •! 11 c Innkeepers 



keepers Act, Ibtb (6), an mnkeeper should, alter Act, 1878. 

 giving proper notice as in that act is pro\ided, 

 sell and dispose of by public auction any carriages 

 or horses which may have been left in the coach- 

 house or stable of the house he keeps, and repay 

 himself for the keep and expense of any horse left 



{x) Johnson v. Hill, 3 Starkie, N. V. C. 172. 



(y) Bhms v. Fiffffott, 9 C. & P. 208. 



(:) Wcstbrook v. Griffith, Moor, 876 ; Bobiuson v. iral/er, 3 

 Bulstrodo, 270. 



{a) Baldwatj v. Onxtcr, 1 Vent. 71 ; JFcstbroo/: v. Griffith, 

 Moor, 876 ; .Vos.i v. Tounsetid, 1 Bnlstr. 207. 



(/') 41 & 12 Vict. c. 38, s. 1. 



