RIDING AND DRIVING HORSES. 12'' 



was his own iinskilfiilnoss in driving, rather 

 than the original act of the defendant. Again, 

 where the defendant hired the plaintiff witli his 

 horses to carry a load of timber to Ipswich, and 

 the plaintiff took the timber as agreed, but by 

 reason of the defendant not giving directions 

 where to unload the timber, the horses — which 

 were heated with their journey — by waiting took 

 cold and some died, it was held the plaintiff's 

 action was not sustainable. If the defendant was 

 wrong in not finding a place to deposit the timber, 

 the plaintiff was to blame for not taking his horses 

 out and putting them into a stable {c). 



But while these cases go to show that a plaintiff riaiutiff 

 will not be entitled to compensation for injury covorlnTe 

 where he has shown nec-liffenco or misconduct, 'i^sshowTi 



^ ° ° ' uegugeuce. 



that negligence or misconduct must be such as the 

 plaintiff is legally responsible for, and co-operate 

 in inflicting the injury (/). As where the de- 

 fendant left his horse and cart standing in the 

 street without any person to watch them, and 

 where some little boys were at play and some of 

 the boys got into the cart, and another boy led 

 the horse on to give them a ride, and one boy fell 

 and got his leg crushed under the wheel, it was 

 held that the defendant was responsible for the 

 fall and broken leg, as it was the natural conse- 



{c) Virtue y. Adam, 2 Lev. 196. 



(/) See ou this Ahhott v. Macfe, 33 L. J., Exch. 177; 

 Maiigan v. Atterton, L. E., 1 Exch. 239. 



