LIVEEY-STABLE KEEPERS. 449 



to use that care, vigilance and foresight under the circum- 

 stances, and in view of the service undertaken, and the mode 

 of conveyance adopted, as would reasonably guard against 

 and prevent accidents and consequent injury to passengers, 

 and slight neglect or want of care in this regard creates lia- 

 bility to respond in damages for the injuries thereby occa- 

 sioned." ^^^ If the hirer simply applies to a livery-stable 

 keeper to drive him between certain points or for a certain 

 time and the latter supplies everything that is necessary, the 

 hirer is in no sense responsible for negligence on the driver's 

 part. But, if the carriage, horse and livery are the property 

 of the person hiring the services of the driver, especially where 

 the driver has often driven the hirer before and the horse 

 is one with whose peculiarities neither the livery-stable keeper 

 nor the driver has had an opportunity of becoming 

 acquainted, there is evidence that the driver is the servant, 

 not of the livery-stable keeper but of the hirer, and the latter 

 is responsible for injuries done by the horse escaping from 

 control.^"" 



A passenger in a livery carriage is not, as a matter of law, 

 guilty of contributory negligence in jumping from the car- 

 riage when the horses start to run away;^*^ nor in getting 

 into the buggy without holding the reins behind a horse 

 said by the stable-keeper to be unsafe.^"^ 



108. Lien of Livery-Stable Keepers — On the principle 

 already stated in discussing agistment, a livery-stable keeper, 

 as he does not confer any additional value on the animal en- 

 trusted to him, is not at the common law entitled to any lien 

 for his services.^"' And if the stable-keeper employs, at the 



"" Benner Livery & U. Co. v. Busson, 58 111. App. 17. 



""Jones V. Scullard, [1898] 2 Q. B. 565. 



'" Benner Livery & U. Co. v. Busson, supra. 



"^ Monroe v. Lattin, 25 Kan. 351. 



""Judson V. Etheridge, i Cr. & Mee. 743; McDonald v. Bennett, 45 

 la. 456; Powers v. Hubbell, 12 La. Ann. 413; Whiting v. Coons, 2 id. 961; 

 Miller v. Marston, 35 Me. 153. 

 29 



