A bailment may also be determined by rescission of the contract of bailment on grounds recognized in contracts generally,4 by the total or partial destruction of the subject-matter, as where a chattel is lost or destroyed,5 or it becomes unfit and unsuitable for the use for which it was hired,6 or by any act of the bailee which is inconsistent with the bailment or which tends to defeat the bailor's right to the property,7 as where the bailee, when not authorized so to do, sells,8 misuses,9

1 Morse vs. Andrascoggin R. Co., 39 Me., 285; Sessions vs. West-tern R. Corp., 16 Gray (Mass.), 132.

2 Benje. vs. Creagh, 21 Ala., 151.

3 New York, etc., R. Co. vs. New Jersey Electric R. Co., 60 N. J. L., 338; 38 Atl., 828.

4 Camp vs. Dill, 37 Ala., 553.

5 Masterson vs. International, etc.

R. Co. (Tex.), Cic. App. 1900: 55 S. W., 577. 6 New York R. Co., vs. New Jersey-Electric R. Co., 60 N. J. L. 338; 38 Atl. 828.

7 Ripley vs. Dolbier, 18 Me., 328.

8 Dunlap vs. Gleason, 16 Mich., 149; 93 Am. Dec, 231.

9 New York, etc., R. Co. vs. New

Jersey Electric R. Co., 60 N. J. L., 338; 38 Atl., 828 or in any way converts,10 the property, purchases it from the bailor,11 or does not perform the conditions of the contract.12

10 Cartlidge vs. Sloan, 124 Ala., 596;

26 So., 918.

11 Dunlap vs. Gleason, 16 Mich.,

158; 93 Am. Dec, 231.

12 Otis vs. Wood, 3 Wend. (N. Y.), 498.