Odger's English Common Law

1
TRESPASS TO GOODS. 45&
when the trespass was committed. But now in some cases a
person in whom is vested a present right to the immediate-
possession of goods is permitted to bring this action. 1
If the
owner of the goods is in possession of them at the date of the
trespass, he of course can sue. But if he voluntarily places
the goods in the exclusive possession of another person (who is
not his servant) for a definite period, that other is—during the
period—the only person who can bring an action of trespass.
As soon as the period has expired, if the goods be not returned,
both the owner and the other person can sue—the latter,
because he is iti possession of them ; the owner,because he has
now a right to have them returned to him. A servant is not
deemed to be in possession of the things which he holds and
uses on behalf of his master ; he has merely the custody of
them : his master has the possession, and he alone can sue.
It is a trespass to goods to write defamatory matter across the face of a
conductor's licence or a servant'3 character ; such writing disturbs the
plaintiff in the enjoyment of his rights. 2
An executor's right to the goods of the testator accrues immediately on
his death, so that an executor can maintain an action of trespass to the
goods of the testator if they are interfered with by a stranger between the
death and grant of probate. 80 an administrator may sue for a trespass to
the goods of his testator committed between the death and the grant of
letters of administration. The possession of the deceased enures for the
benefit of his personal representative. 3
Again, if goods are delivered to a bailee and are taken out of the bailee's
possession by a stranger, the bailee has all the rights and remedies which
the owner would have had if there had been no bailment. And so has the
bailor in those cases of bailment in which he is entitled to resume posses-
sion of his goods at will, such as a deposit for safe custody or a gratuitous
loan. In other cases he cannot sue, because he has neither possession nor
a right to the immediate possession. And if the owner has contracted to
give the bailee exclusive possession of his goods, as upon a hiring or pledge,
his right to recover the goods from strangers wrongfully possessed of theln
is suspended during the continuance of the bailment. But when a bailment
of any kind is determined, the owner may sue to recover his goods or their
value from any person into whose hands they may have come, as well as
from the bailee. 4
1 Bailiffs of Dunwieh v, Sterry (1831), 1 B. & Ad. 831 ; but see JR. v. Clinton
(1869), 4 Ir. E. (0. L.) 6.
2 Eurrell v. Ellis (1845),
27 ;
2 C. B. 295 ; Sogers v. Macnamara (1853), 14 0. B.
Wennhah v. Morgan (1888), 20 Q. B. D. 635.
» Morgan v. Thomas (1853), 8 Exch. 302 ; Kirk v. Gregory (1876), 1 Ex. D. 55.
1 Lotan T. Cross (1810), 2 Camp. 464 ; White v. Morris (1852), 11 C. B. 1015 ;
and see Johnson v. Bvprose, [1893] 1 Q. B. at p. 515.