did not exist between A and B, though as to most of the other inmates of the hotel that relation probably did arise. A restaurant or coffee-house is not an inn for it furnishes food only. A lodging-house is not an inn for its proprietor does not undertake to accommodate all who may apply. The same is true of a boarding-house. A sleeping-car is not an inn, nor is a steamboat which provides food and lodging for passengers, though as to the latter there is some authority to the contrary. The distinction is very close. The test may be stated as follows:-Does the proprietor hold himself out as ready to entertain all transients who may apply and who are able and willing to pay for accommodation? 216. Who are guests of an inn?—It will be seen from the example given in the preceding section that not every person who becomes an inmate of an inn can be called a guest. In that example B was a tenant. A guest is a transient whose sojourn is uncertain and temporary. The term during which the relation is contemplated to endure may be definite, but the surrounding circumstances must show that the guest is not regularly or permanently residing at the hotel. The fact that one is a resident of the same town does not necessarily prevent him from becoming a guest. It has been held that one may become a guest before engaging a room, but one who merely leaves his baggage with a porter of a hotel without intending to engage a room, will ordinarily not become a guest unless, perhaps, he takes a meal at the hotel while his baggage is checked there. If one goes to a hotel with the intention of getting entertainment there and if his baggage is accepted by the proprietor, he becomes a guest, even if he changes his mind before receiving any entertainment whatever. 217. Rights and duties of innkeepers and guest.-An innkeeper follows a public calling and is bound to receive all fit and orderly persons provided he has accommodations for them. This is a duty imposed by law, and the violation of it will render the innkeeper liable to whatever damages the traveler may suffer, including in some cases punitive damages. The innkeeper is bound to receive the goods of the traveler, not, however, without limit. Just where this limit is to be placed is difficult to say, but it has been held repeatedly that a traveler's baggage may not be limited strictly to the money and goods needed for the purpose of the journey. The innkeeper undertakes to use reasonable care to protect his guest from injury. If he harbors drunkards or other vicious men he will be responsible for the injury they may do the other guests. He must keep his inn in a safe and sanitary condition and must provide wholesome food. The innkeeper is a bailee of his guest's belongings with exceptional rights and duties arising out of the history of his calling. In olden times the wayfarer's lot was very hard. Unless he could procure lodging over night while on his journey, which, because of slow means of travel, often kept him out on the road for many days, he became the prey of the thieves who infested the road. Thus it became necessary to impose on the innkeeper the duty of receiving guests without discrimination. Nor was this all. The innkeeper was prevented from colluding with thieves, for he was compelled to use more care in the protection of his guest's property than was demanded of an ordinary bailee. This extraordinary liability of the innkeeper has been variously defined. The various rules that have been applied may be reduced to the three following: 1. The innkeeper is presumed to be liable for the loss of the property in his charge, but he may overcome this presumption by showing that the loss was not due to his negligence. 2. The innkeeper is excused from liability if he can show that the loss was due to inevitable accident or irresistible force. 3. The innkeeper is an insurer of the property of his guest against all losses except those due to the act of God, the public enemy, or the negligence of the guest. The weight of the authority is with the third rule, but this is being changed by statute in many states, and in other jurisdictions the courts themselves are tending to the more reasonable second rule. 218. Innkeeper's compensation and lien.-Because the innkeeper is compelled to give entertainment to all who apply, the law has given him privileges greater than those accorded to the ordinary bailee. He has a lien for unpaid charges upon all the goods put into his possession by the guest. This lien extends to the property of third persons if at the time it was brought into the hotel, the proprietor had no notice of the true ownership. This rule, of course, does not apply to property which the guest had no right to place in the custody of the innkeeper. By statute enacted in most states, the lien may be enforced by public sale of the goods after due notice of the proposed sale has been given. 219. Termination of relation of innkeeper and guest. -The innkeeper has no right to terminate the relation of innkeeper and guest, except for some cause that would have justified him in refusing to receive the guest upon application. The guest, however, may terminate the relation at will. He ceases to be a guest when his bill is paid and his name is stricken from the hotel reg ister. The innkeeper must give the guest a reasonable opportunity to remove his baggage after the termination of the relation and until such reasonable time has expired, the innkeeper's liability for the baggage of his guest remains. CHAPTER XIII COMMON CARRIERS 220. Definition.-A common carrier is one who, by general advertisement or by conduct, holds himself out to transport for hire the goods of all who apply to him. The duty of a common carrier is so great that it is important to know to just what forms of business the name, common carrier, can be given. The test is, does the carrier make of his business a public calling, does he undertake to transport for all persons indifferently. Thus railroad, steamboat, street car and express companies, and the owners of hacks, drays, stage coaches, omnibuses and boats have all been held to be common carriers, while sleeping car, telegraph and telephone, log-driving and booming companies, bridge, turnpike and canal companies, postmasters and mail carriers and the owners of towing boats have been held to escape the severe liability placed by the law on common carriers. The courts are not uniform in their holdings, and so we find that one who is a common carrier in one state may be a private carrier in another. In Tennessee and Pennsylvania, for example, a farmer who occasionally and incidentally accepts parcels from neighbors to be carried to or from town on his regular trips made in the conduct of his own business would be held to the liability of a common carrier, whereas, in other states he would be called a private carrier. |