Where the bailment is for the sole benefit of the bailee, he is bound to great care or extroardinary diligence and is responsible for slight neglect in relation to the subject-matter of the bailment.1 He is not responsible, however, for reasonable wear and tear of what is loaned,2 or for its utter loss or damage without blame or neglect attributable to himself.3

A bailee who is driving his own horse in the carriage of the bailor, at the request of the latter, merely as a means of recreation and amusement for both of them, is liable for damage to the carriage if he does not use common prudence and is careless and negligent.4

Bailments of this character correspond to the commodatum under the Roman law classification. "Use is the gist of this bailment, and the bailee has the right to use the chattel in accordance with the terms of the bailment contract. A slight departure from the bailment purpose is at the peril of the bailee and makes him absolutely liable for any damage to the property. There is even greater reason why the borrower should be strictly confined to the contemplated use of the chattel than exists in the case of other bailees." 5

1 Cullen va. Lord, 39 Iowa, 302;

Casey vs. Suter, 36 Md., 1.

2 Blakemore vs. Bristol R. Co., 8

E. & B., 1,035; 92 E. C. L., 11,035. 3 Fortune vs. Harris, 51 N. C, 532;

Parker vs. Gaines (Ark.), 1899; 11 S. W., 693. Carpenter vs. Branch, 13 Vt., 161; 37 Am. Dec, 587. 5 Goddard on Bailments, Sec. 61.