lee,
gets any compensation for storage. In our lecture relating to sales we
stated that the seller would not be liable for the loss of anything
intrusted to his keeping after it had been bought of him unless he was
grossly negligent, for the reason that no reward or compensation is
paid to him for storage. There are, therefore, two rules which govern
many cases. If a person keeps a thing for a reward or compensation,
then he is bound by a stricter rule of diligence than in those cases
in which he receives nothing for his service. This accords with the
common reason of mankind. Evidently if a person keeps a thing simply
as an act of kindness, he ought not to be responsible in the same
sense that one is held responsible who is paid a fixed price for such
service.

Another good illustration is that of a bank which keeps the bonds of a
depositor in its safe for his accommodation. The bank does not pretend
to be a safe-deposit company or anything of the kind, but it has a
large vault and wishes to accommodate its customers by keeping their
stocks and bonds and other articles for them while they are off on
vacations or for other reasons. It is a common thing for a customer to
go to his bank, especially in the country, and ask the cashier to keep
his valuables during his absence. The cashier is willing to comply,
and the things are intrusted to him; but as the bank receives no
compensation for this service it is not responsible for their loss
unless it is grossly negligent in the matter. Suppose they are put in
the safe among other valuables belonging to the bank and a robber
breaks in and takes them away--is the bank responsible? Certainly not.
On the other hand, if the customer should leave his valuables at a
safe-deposit company, a different rule would apply, because that
company charges him for keeping the articles. It is therefore bound by
a stricter rule than the bank. It must use the greatest care, and if
neglectful in any respect it is responsible for the consequences.

Suppose a person should say to me: "Will you be good enough to leave
this package with a jeweller on your way down street?" I say to my
friend: "Certainly, with the greatest pleasure." What degree of care
must I use in carrying that package? Only ordinary care. Suppose in
going along the street a thief, without my knowledge, should walk
beside me and slip his hand into my pocket and take the package, and
on my arrival at the jewellery store I should f