DUTIES AND LIABILITIES OP THE BAILEE. 427 



The bailee of sheep should, in the absence of an express 

 contract as to the manner of keeping, keep them separate 

 from his ram during the period when he should restrain the 

 latter from running at large.*^ 



The bailee is not liable for an accidental injury or illness 

 happening to the animal not due in any way to negligence ;^^ 

 except where he has failed to return it when the contract of 

 hiring expired.^^ Thus, where one borrowed a horse which, 

 when being driven, stumbled and was injured, the borrower 

 is not liable if he can prove he has exercised reasonable care.^* 

 Some evidence of negligence must be given : the naked fact 

 that the animal has become sick on a journey, or has been re- 

 turned with its knees broken, has been held not sufficient to 

 raise the presumption of negligence.'^ But the modern rule 

 appears to be that proof of the non-return of the animal or of 

 its return in an injured condition is prima facie evidence of 

 negligence : the burden of accounting for these facts is on the 

 bailee.'^ If the horse is not fit for the journey for which it 

 was hired and becomes lame, it has been held that the hirer 

 may leave it at an inn and give notice to the owner who is 

 bound to send for it, and cannot recover for the price agreed 

 on for the journey nor for the loss of the animal's services 

 after notice.'^ 



Where an ice company hired horses for scraping snow from 

 ice, it was held not to be bound to have at that place ropes 

 and appliances for hauHng the horses out of the water in case 



" Phelps V. Paris, 39 Vt. 511. 



'' Fortune v. Harris, 6 Jones L. (N. C.) 532; Millon v. Salisbury, 13 

 Johns. (N. Y.) 211; Hovey v. Bromley, 85 Hun (N. Y.) 540; Buis v. 

 Cook, 60 Mo. 391; Leach v. French, 69 Me. 389; Henderson v. Barnes, 

 32 U. C. Q. B. 176. 



" Cochran v. Walker (Tex. Civ. App.), 49 S. W. Rep. 403. 



" Bain v Strang, 16 Rettie (Sc. Ct. Sess.) 186. 



"Leach v. French, supra; Carrier v. Dorrance, 19 S. C. 30; Cooper v. 

 Barton, 3 Camp, s, note. 



°° See Schouler Bailm. (3d ed.) § 23; 3 Amer. & Eng. Encyc. of Law 

 (2d. ed.) 750. See, also, § 104, infra. 



" Chew V. Jones, 10 L. T. 231. 



