458 BAILMENT. 



hand, where the plaintiff's hired man boarded at the defend- 

 ant's inn for some months and kept the plaintiff's horses 

 in his livery-stable, going out with them to work every morn- 

 ing and returning them at night, and the defendant charged 

 a fixed sum per week for the man's board and the horses' 

 keep, it was held that the defendant had no lien on the horses 

 for their keep, neither the plaintiff nor his man being a guest 

 within the common-law meaning of the term, and there being 

 no continuing possession of the horses nor right to it.^^^ And 

 where an innkeeper issued invitations to a Fourth of July 

 party at the inn with music, supper, and horse-stabling for 

 two dollars and one attended and paid the two dollars re- 

 quired and more for drinks, it was held, in an action brought 

 by the latter for an injury to his horse, that the relation of 

 innkeeper and guest did not exist.^^* 



An occasional absence of the guest does not destroy this 

 relationship so far as concerns either the lien or the degree 

 of care required of the innkeeper.^^^ 



The point has been raised whether a traveller who sends 

 his horse in advance to an inn, saying he would soon be there 

 himself, is to be deemed a guest from the time the innkeeper 

 receives his property.^^^ The relation is not terminated 

 when the guest has paid his bill and his servant has begun to 

 harness the team.^^^ 



The innkeeper's lien on the property of his guest is given 

 to him by law as compensation for the high degree of care 

 that is required of him and for the necessity he is under of 

 accepting, like a common carrier, whatever is brought to 

 him. It extends to the animals of his guest both for their 



"' Neale v. Croker, 8 U. C. C. P. 224. 



So, where the owners of a line of stages entered into a contract with an 

 innkeeper for the stabling and feed of their horses: Dixon v. Dalby, 



11 U. C. Q. B. 79. 



'"' Fitch V. easier, 17 Hun (N. Y.) 126. 



"' Grinnell v. Cook, 3 Hill (N. Y.) 485, per Bronson, J.; Allen v. Smith, 



12 C. B. N. S. 638. 



"" Grinnell v. Cook, supra. ^' Seymour v. Cook, 53 Barb. (N. Y.) 45U 



