H I R E . B o o k XXXI.
An excefs in
the ufe induces
a proportionable
relponfibility
in cafe o f accident.
any article not moretroublefome or prejudicial in the carriage than
wheat, fuch as,barley, or rape-feed, a s all articles of that defcrip-
tio.n are included in the permiffion contained in the contract, becaufe
of their not occafioning any difference, or becaufe they may be even
preferable to what was fpecified in it, as being lels, prejudicial, The
hirer, however, is not at liberty to load the animal with any article of
a more prejudicial nature, in the,carriage, than wheat, (fuch 3.s,fait,
for inftance,) fince to this the leffor had not aflented.
If a perfon hire an animal to carry a certain, quantity of cotton,
he is not at liberty to load the animal with a fimilar quantity of iron,
fince it is highly probable that the carriage of the iron may be more
prejudicial to the animal than, the carriage of the cotton, Jo t this, rea-
fon, that the iron preffes chiefly on one" fpot of the creature, s back,
whereas the cotton preffes on it equally in all parts.
If a perfon hire an animal to carry a certain quantity of wheat,
and load it with a greater quantity, and the animal perifh, he is re-
fponfible in the proportion of the excefs load. Thus a perfon, for
inftance, hires an animal to carry ten Kafeezs of wheat,, and loads
him with fifteen Kafeezs, and -the animal perifhqs: in which cafe
he is re,fponfible for one third of the value, of the animal. The rea-
fon of this is that the animal ,in queftiqn has perifhed in confequence
both of what has been permitted,to the hirer, and alfo, of what has
not been permitted; as,, therefore,.the deftruffiqn has been occafibned
by the whole burden, it. is divided between both .part&jefpe'jftively;
and accordingly, nothing is accounted upon. the proportion allowed,
but an indemnification is due upon the proportion ««allowed. If
however, the hirer had overloaded the animal, to a degree beyond
what it was able to bear, he is, in this , cafe, refponfible for the
whole of the value, fince he was utterly unauthorifed to aft thus*
as it is altogether unufual to do fo.
If
H I R E .
I f a perfon hire an animal for his own riding, and he take up another
perfon behind him upon the animal, and the animal perifh, he
is refponfible for one half of the value.— No regard is paid to the load
in this inftance, becaufe a-perfon who does not underftand riding will
hurt an animal’ s back, although he be o f light weight, as, on the
contrary, a complete rider fits light on horfeback, although his perfon,
be heavy.— Befides, a man is not an article of weight, whence
his weight cannot be afcertained; and accordingly regard muft be paid
to the nvwber of the riders, in the fame manner as, in offences againft
the perfon, regard is paid to the number of the offenders,;— in other
words, if one perfon accidentally give another ten wounds, and a
fecond perfon give him one wound, and the wounded period die, the
fine of blood is due from both in equal fhares.— What is here advanced
proceeds on a fuppofition of the animal in queftion being capable of
carrying double; for if it be incapable of carrying double, the hirer is
refponfible for the whole value,, in the fame manner, as in the cafe of
wheat.—It is alfo to be obferved that, in the fame manner as this rule
applies to admits, fo does it likewife to infants capable of riding alone
upon an animal: but if the hirer place behind him an infant incapable
of riding alone, it is the fame as goods or effects, and he
is, in fuch cafe, refponfible only in proportion to the additional
load,
If a perfon hire an animal for riding, and pull the halter, or beat
the animal, fo as to occafion its death, he is refponfible for the whole
value, according to Haneefa. The two difciples maintain that he is
not refponfible where he only pulls the halter or beats the animal in
fuch a degree as is cuftomary, fince every thing cuftomary is included
in the contract, and therefore the cafe is the fame as if he were to perform
thofe acfts by exprefs permiffion of the owner, whence he is. not
refponfible.—The argument of Haneefa is that the owner’s permiffion
is reftridted to the condition of fafety, fince an animal may be driven
without either pulling the halter or beating it, both of thefe being an
Vol. III. U u exceffive
9
A rider, taking
up anad-
ditionalrider,
incurs refpon-
fibili’-y for
h a lf the value
o f the animal.
An hired animal
perilhing
from ill ufage
fubjedts the
hirer to re-
fponfibility*