In a few minutes, Rollo came back with the money in his hand, and said,
"She won't take it. She said I must bring it back. It was as much as I could do to get her to take the wallet."
"But she must take it," replied his father. "You carry it to her again, and tell her she has nothing to do with the business. The money is for Sarah, and she must not refuse it, but take it and give it to her the first opportunity."
So Rollo carried the money again to Dorothy. She received it this time, and put it in the wallet, and then deposited both in a safe place in her work-table. Then Rollo came back to his father to ask him a little more about bailments.
"Father," said Rollo, when he came back, "if James should give me his knife, or any thing, for my own, would that be a bailment?"
"No," said his father. "A bailment is only where property is intrusted to another, for a certain purpose, to be returned again to the possession of the owner, when the purpose is accomplished. For instance, when Jonas is sawing wood with my saw, the saw is a bailment from me to him; it remains my property; but he is to use it for a specific purpose, and then return it to my possession."
"He does not bring it back to you," said Rollo.
"No, but he hangs it up in its place in my shed, which is putting it again in my possession. And so all the things which Dorothy uses in the kitchen are bailments."
"And if she breaks them, must she pay for them?"
"No, not unless she is grossly careless. If she exercises good ordinary care, such as prudent persons exercise about their own things, then she is not liable, because she is using them mainly for my benefit, and of course it must be at my risk. But if Sarah should come and borrow a pitcher to carry some milk home in, and should let it fall and break it by the way, even if it was not gross carelessness, she ought to pay for it; that is, the person that sent her ought to pay for it, for it was bailed to her for her benefit alone; and therefore it was at her risk."
"I should not think you would make her pay for it," said Rollo.
"No, I certainly should not. I am only telling what I should have a right to do if I chose.
"Sometimes a thing is bailed to a person," continued Rollo's father, "for the benefit of both persons, the bailor and the bailee."
"The bailee?" said James.
"Yes, the bailee is the person the thing is bailed to. For instance, if I leave my watch at the watchmaker's to be mended, and I am going to pay him for it, in that case you see it is for his advantage and mine too."
"And then, if it is lost, must he pay for it?"
"Yes; unless he takes good care of it. If it is for his benefit alone, then he must take special care of it, or else he is liable for the loss of it. If it is for my benefit alone, then he must take ordinary care of it. For instance, suppose I had a very superior repeater watch, which the watchmaker should come and borrow of me, in order to see the construction of it. Then suppose I should leave another watch of mine,-a lever,-at his shop to be repaired. Suppose also I should have a third watch, a lady's watch, which I had just bought somewhere, and I should ask him to be kind enough to keep it for me, a day or two, till my watch was done. These would be three different kinds of bailments. The repeater would be bailed to him for his benefit; the lever for his and mine jointly, and the lady's watch for my benefit alone.
"Now, you see," continued Rollo's father, "that if these watches should get lost or injured in any way, the question whether the watchmaker would have to pay for them or not, would depend upon the degree of care it would have required to save them. For instance, if he locked them all up with special care, and particularly the repeater, and then the building were struck with lightning and the watches all destroyed, he would not have to pay for any of them; for this would be an inevitable accident, which all his care could not guard against. It would have been as likely to have happened to my repeater, if I had kept it at home.
"But suppose now he should hang all three watches up at his window, and a boy in the street should accidentally throw a stone and hit the window, so that the stone should go through the glass and break one of the watches. Now, if the repeater was the one that was hit, I should think the man would be bound to pay for it: because he was bound to take very special care of that, as it was borrowed for his benefit alone. But if it was the lady's watch, which he had taken only as an accommodation to me, then he would not be obliged to pay; for, by hanging it up with his other watches, he took ordinary care of it, and that was all that he was obliged to take."
"I should think," said James, "that the boy would have to pay, if he broke the watches."
"Yes," said Rollo's father; "but we have nothing to do with the boy now, we are only considering the liabilities of the watchmaker."
"And if it had been the lever that was broken," asked Rollo, "what then?"
"Why, as to the lever," said his father, "he was bound to take good care of it,-something more than mere ordinary care; and I don't know whether the law would consider hanging watches up at a window as good care or not. It would depend upon that, I suppose. But the watches might be lost in another way. Suppose the watchmaker had sent the repeater home to me, and then, at night, had put the lever and the lady's watch into a small trunk with his other watches, and carried them to his house, as watchmakers do sometimes. Now suppose that, when he got home, he put the trunk of watches down in a corner of the room; and suppose that there was a leak in the roof of his house, so that the water could come in sometimes when it rained. In the night there comes up a shower, and the water gets into the trunk, and rusts and spoils the watches. Now I think it probable that he would not have to pay for the lady's watch, for he took ordinary care of that,-that is, the same care that he was accustomed to take of his own watches. But he might have to pay for the other; for he was bound to take good care of that one, as it was partly for his benefit that it was bailed to him; and putting them where they were at all exposed to be wet, would be considered, I suppose, as not taking good care of them."
"And so he would not have to pay for the lady's watch, in any case," said Rollo.
"Yes, he would, if he did not take ordinary care of it; that is, if he was grossly negligent. For instance, if he should take all the rest of his watches home, and leave that in his shop upon the counter, where I had laid it down, and somebody should come in the night and steal it, then, perhaps he would be liable."
By this time, Rollo's father began to think that his law lecture had been long enough for such young students, and so he said that he would not tell them any more about it then. "But now," said he, in conclusion, "I want you to remember what I have said, and practise according to it. Boys bail things to one another very often, and a great many disputes arise among them, because they don't understand the law of bailment. It applies to boys as well as men. It is founded on principles of justice and common sense, and, of course, what is just and equitable among men, is just and equitable among boys.