198. Liability of Carrier for Merchandise Shipped as Baggage. 649-651 199. Passenger Must Either Own the Baggage or Have a Special In- 5. 6. Modern Classification with Reference to Benefit. Classification of Locatio Bailments as Ordinary and Extraordinary. 7. Graphic Chart. DEFINITION 1. A bailment is the relation created through the transfer of the possession of goods or chattels, by a person called the bailor to a person called the bailee, without a transfer of ownership, for the accomplishment of a certain purpose, whereupon the goods or chattels are to be dealt with according to the instructions of the bailor. There are nearly as many definitions of a bailment as there are writers on the subject. The definition given in the black letter is submitted with the intention, not of adding to an already too numerous collection, but rather of furnishing a composite description of some practical utility. Its accuracy, or lack of it, will appear as the general subject is developed and no elaborate attempt to justify it will be made here. Even an extended explication of the DOB.BAILM.-1 terms of the definition, will be postponed until the next chapter, which treats of the legal icidents inhering in the bailment relation. A bailment is usually defined as a delivery,' or transfer of the possession, of chattels under certain circumstances; but it is defined above, not as a. delivery of goods, but as a relation resulting from this delivery. It seems clearer and more accurate to designate delivery as merely one of the essential elements of the definition and to say that, when it and all the other essential elements are present, there springs up a legal relation which we call a bailment. The bailment does not rise to the dignity of a status, such as marriage. As å relation, however, it is upon the same plane as other important legal relations, such as agency, master and servant, or even partnership. Since the bailment relation is created by a delivery of goods in the sense of a transfer of the possession of the chattels, this necessarily involves one person making the delivery and another to whom the delivery is made. The deliverer, the person actively creating the bailment, is called the bailor; the “deliveree,” the person more or less passively accepting the bailment, is called the bailee. Possession is thus transferred by the bailor to the bailee. Though possession must pass in order that there may be a bailment, such possession must pass alone, and not in connection with, or as an incident to, ownership. If ownership passes, either with or without possession, the transaction then becomes, as we shall see (in section 3), not a bailment, but a gift or sale. So fundamental is this that some writers describe bailments solely in terms of this unique feature. Thus Hammond refers to a bailment as "possession of a chattel lawfully severed from its ownership," while in the sixteenth century St. Germain gives us this happy and naive description of a bailment: "Goods that a man hath in his keeping which be not his own." Not a few distinguished writers (including Sir William Jones, Story, and Kent), in their definitions, refer to a bailment as the delivery of a thing "in trust." This terminology is somewhat 1 See definitions given under note 2. 2 Bailment is defined by Sir William Jones (Jones, Bailm. 1) as being a delivery of goods in trust, on a contract, express or implied, that the trust shall be duly executed, and the goods redelivered as soon as the time or use for which they were bailed shall have elapsed or been performed. According to Judge Story (Story, Bailm. c. 1, § 2) a bailment is "a delivery of a thing in trust, for some special object or purpose, and upon a contract, express or implied, to conform to the object or purpose of the trust." In Kent's Commentaries (2 Kent, Comm. [4th Ed.] lect. 40, p. 558) a bailment is said to be "a delivery of goods on trust, upon a contract, express or implied, that the trust shall be duly executed, and the goods restored by the bailee, as soon as confusing, however, for in a technical trust the trustee has the legal title to the goods held in trust. In a bailment, as we have just seen, the bailee has merely possession, but not title or ownership. The motive actuating the bailor in creating the bailment is "the accomplishment of a certain purpose," so it is for the execution of this purpose by the bailee that possession of the goods is transferred to him by the bailor. This is called the bailment purpose, and its nature plays an important part in the classification of bail ments. When the bailment purpose is fully accomplished, the goods are to be dealt with by the bailee "according to the instructions of the bailor." In a majority, perhaps, of the cases, the goods are then to be redelivered to the bailor. Accordingly, some definitions specify such a return to the owner as an essential element in a bailment. It is clear, though, that the instructions of the bailor are decisive of this question, and these instructions frequently indicate that, after the bailment purpose is accomplished, the bailee must deliver the goods to a person other than the bailor. Thus, the carrier must deliver the goods after the carriage of the goods is over, to the consignee. Again, the factor or commission merchant keeps the goods of the bailor for sale to a third person, and on such a sale the factor is to deliver the goods to such third person as the purchaser. There are even cases when the bailor's instructions contemplate that the bailee himself is, on the performance of certain conditions, to keep the goods as their owner.' the purpose of the bailment shall be answered." Numerous other definitions, or unimportant variations on the definitions given, may be found in the reported cases. The essential elements of a bailment are now so well recognized, however, that modern accepted definitions differ rather in the wording than in legal effect. A contract whereby the owner of a sawmill and timber employed another to take possession of the mill and timber and saw the timber into lumber for the owner created the relation of bailor and bailee, both as to the timber and lumber. Chaffin v. State, 5 Ga. App. 368, 63 S. E. 230. See, also, as to what constitutes a bailment, Pribble v. Kent, 10 Ind. 325, 71 Am. Dec. 327; La Farge v. Rickert, 5 Wend. (N. Y.) 187, 21 Am. Dec. 209; Tuttle v. Campbell, 74 Mich. 652, 42 N. W. 384, 16 Am. St. Rep. 652; Bohannon v. Springfield, 9 Ala. 789; Oakley v. State, 40 Ala. 372; Green v. Hollingsworth, 5 Dana (Ky.) 173, 30 Am. Dec. 680; Newhall v. Paige, 10 Gray (Mass.) 366; Dunlap v. Gleason, 16 Mich. 158, 93 Am. Dec. 231; Wadsworth v. Allcott, 6 N. Y. 64; Poe v. Horne, 44 N. C. 398; Henry v. Patterson, 57 Pa. 346; Furlow v. Gillian, 19 Tex. 250; Armour & Co. v. Ross, 78 S. C. 294, 58 S. E. 941, 1135; Blondell v. Consolidated Gas Co., 89 Md. 732, 43 Atl. 817, 46 L. R. A. 187; Chaffin v. State, 5 Ga. App. 368, 63 S. E. 230; Northcutt v. State, 60 Tex. Cr. R. 259, 131 S. W. 1128, 31 L. R. A. (N. S.) 822; Bates v. Bigby, 123 Ga. 727, 51 S. E. 717. As in the so-called "sale on approval," discussed in section 3. HISTORICAL 2. Though bailments are practically as old as society, the law of bailments as a part of English jurisprudence has been of comparatively recent development. Historical Outline The mere definition of a bailment necessarily shows in itself that bailments must have been more or less frequent even in the most primitive stages of society. Thus, even in the remotest of historical eras, it is easy to imagine a man keeping the goods of another, or carrying them from place to place, or becoming a bailee of the spears of his fellow tribesmen to sharpen them or otherwise repair them. It is, therefore, all the more remarkable that the subject of bailments was so slow to assume a place of importance in English law. Especially is this true when we consider the part played by bailments in the jurisprudence of the world. Thus, frequent mention is made of bailments, and elaborate provisions are made concerning them, in the wonderful, ancient Babylonian Code of Hammurabi. Even the earliest of the Mosaic Codes, the so-called "JE Code," brief as it is, contains several provisions on the subject." Bailments played a large part in Roman law, and under this remarkable jurisprudence the law of bailments was worked out with a wondrous wealth of detail, particularly in connection with real and consensual contracts. To the Roman law, the English law of bailments is indebted for many of its principles and also in a large measure for its terminology. Of the earlier English writers, Bracton, in the thirteenth century, wrote of bailments. His work, however, was largely a mere restatement of Roman law, and he made no convincing application of these principles to the practical conditions of his time. Coke' 4 See Cook, The Law of Moses and Code of Hammurabi. 5 Thus in the twenty-second chapter of the book of Exodus, these expressions are found "If a man shall deliver unto his neighbor money or stuff to keep" (verse 7); "If a man borrow aught of his neighbor" (verse 14); “If it be an hired thing" (verse 15). 6 See Morey, Outlines of Roman Law, pp. 355–358, 365-368; Leage, Roman Private Law, pp. 264-271, 297-300; Sandar's Justinian (Hammond) pp. 405410, 448-452. 7 Coke, First Inst. 89a, 89b. See, also, Rolle, Abr. (1668) tit. "Bailment;" Brooke, Abr. (1576). An interesting historical treatment of bailments is found in Holmes, The Common Law, pp. 164-205, and also in 2 Street, Foundations of Legal Liability, pp. 251–269. |