case Lovett against Hobbs a stage coachman be a common carrier within the  custom of the realm and be liable for the loss of good which the passenger  take with they for he have the charge of both their property and their person  case the plaintiff declare for that Richard Hobbs on the first day of November  in the thirtyfirst year of Charles the second and long before and after be and  yet be a common hackney coachman and a common carrier as well of man person as  of their good and chattel in his coach from the borough of Marlborough to the  city of London and thence to Marlborough pro mercede et tribute to be pay for  person and their good and also that all common coachman and common carrier by  the law and custom of England a ought safe and secure to keep all passenger  good a in trespass for revving a distress for nonpayment of poor rate one  question be whether beast of the plough can be take and Lord Mansfield in  deliver the judgement of the court say the solid distinction be between those  distress which be make under Elizabeth c and other penal statute where a sale  of the good be direct and a distress at commonlaw where the good take be to be  hold by way of pledge and on this distinction it be hold that beast of the  plough and all other implement and utensil in trade though not distrainable at  commonlaw be distrainable for the poor rate under the Elizabeth c and such  like act of parliament Hutchins v chamber burr this distinction have be adopt  in the case of distress for rend where the officer seize the wear apparel of  the tenant and it be object that such good like utensil in trade or beast of  the plough can not be distrain but Lord Kenyon hold that as the statute of  will mary c have give the distrainer power to sell the reason of the commonlaw  which depend on the good take be in the nature of a pledge have vanish and  therefore that the wear apparel be distrainable Caldwell v tailor Consts edit  of bott poor law vol page note a but if implement of trade or beast of the  plough be in actual use at the time or if there be other sufficient distress  on the premise they can be distrain Gordon v Falkner term Rep see also ld ray    light a Bl Com burr burr salk and term Rep a common carrier be liable by the  commonlaw or general custom of the realm and to recite it say Mr Hargrave in  the declaration as be sometime the practice both with respect to innkeeper and  carrier seem not only unnecessary but shower KB er p and chattel from loss and  whereas the plaintiff the day and year aforesaid at Marlborough aforesaid have  deliver to the defendant one box in which be several good and chattel of the  plaintiff videlicet c to be carry from Marlborough to the city of London and  safe to be deliver to the plaintiff there and the plaintiff in fact say that  the defendant afterward videlicet November aforesaid take his journey towards  London and the d of November perform his journey and come to London and yet  notwithstanding shower KB the defendant be negligent of his office of a common  coachman and common carrier do not safe and secure carry the say box and good  and deliver they to the plaintiff whereby the plaintiff lose her say good to  the value of sixty pound and lie it to her damage of one hundred pound upon  not guilty plead it come to Salisbury assize before the then Mr justice Jones  where upon evidence the case appear that the plaintiff be a passenger in the  defendant coach which be a stagecoach between London and Marlborough and the  good carry with her upon which I be of counsel with the defendant urge that  the action lie not for that a common coachman be but a new invention and not  within the commonlaw or custom of England concern common carrier that this be  not for conveyance of good but of person and whatsoever good of passenger be  by they carry be still in the passenger custody and they remove they to their  own chamber at night in their inn and if this shall hold where will it end it  may as well be bring for the ring on their finger or money in their pocket  which highwayman rob the passenger of but the judge be of opinion that if a  coachman common carry good and take money for so do he will be in the same  case with a common carrier and be a carrier for that purpose whether the good  be a passenger or a stranger b the like of a waterman or Gravesend boat which  carry both man and good then we be force to give evidence of our coachs be  full our refusal to carry they and that without our knowledge at first the  porter put up the box behind the coach which when we perceive we deny to take  the charge of it c I the judge agree this to be a good answer for if a ostler  refuse a guest his house be full and yet the party say he will shift c if he  be rob the ostler be discharge d this fact be leave to the jury there be a  verdict for the defendant Mr pollexfen and other for the plaintiff Mr Eyre and  myself for the defendant shower KB in this case it be agree that there needs  no particular agreement for hire to render a common carrier liable because  when there be none the carrier may have a quantum to deserve for it there be  one exception not observe videlicet the defendant be allege to be a common  carrier from Marlborough to London and he never come so far it be only to  saint James market and no far and there he take the good up when he come  towards Marlborough which be a different terminus ad who from what they  declare upon which be that he do not deliver at London now on the evidence it  appear even rather improper because it tend to confound the distinction  between special custom which ought to be plead and the general custom of the  realm of which the court be bind to take notice without plead accord it seem  to be admit that describe the defendant to be a common carrier without any  thing more be sufficient hob side hard Mod will   light note b but it seem  that a carrier be not liable on the loss of a passenger good unless he be pay  for the carriage of the good as well as the conveyance of the passenger  Middleton v foul salk Upshare v Aidee comens Rep holt skin but queen for hire  be not the only and principal ground on which the carrier be liable the great  cause of the law charge he be the public employment he exercise   light a note  b and ld raym salk Mod viner Abr c see Mod burr term Rep term Rep d white case  dyer dr saint Fitzherbert n b Spencer case dyer shower KB er p he never come  to London and so be not bind thereto nor such a carrier as they have declare  of michaelmas term the thirtysecond of Charles the second in the king bench  sir William Scroggs Knt chief justice sir William dolben Knt sir Thomas  Raymond Knt sir Thomas Jones Knt justice sir Creswell levinz Knt attorney  general sir Francis winnington Knt solicitor general