BREAKING BULK. The doctrine of breaking bulk proceeds upon the ground of a determination of the privity of the bail ment by the wrongful act of the bailee. Thus, where a carrier had agreed to carry certain bales of goods, which were delivered to him, to Southampton, but carried them to another place, broke open the bales, and took the goods contained in them feloniously and converted them to his own use, the ma jority of the judges held that if the party had sold the entire bales it would not have been felony; "but as he broke them, and took what was in them, he did it without warrant," and so was guilty of felony; Y. B. 13 Edw. IV. fol. 9. If a miller steals part of the meal, "although the corn was deliv ered to him to grind, nevertheless, if he steal it it is felony, being taken from the rest;" 1 ' Rolle, Abr. 73, pl. 16; Com. v. James, 1 Pick. (Mass.) 375. This construction involves the absurd consequence of its being felony to steal part of a package, but a breach of trust to steal the whole.
In au early case in Massachusetts, it was decided that if a wagon-load of goods, con sisting of several packages, is delivered to a common carrier to be transported in a body to a certain place, and he, with a fe lonious intent, separates one entire package, whether before or after the delivery of the other packages, this is a sufficient breaking of bulk to constitute larceny, without any breaking of the package so separated; Com.
v. Brown, 4 Mass. 580. But this decision is iu direct conflict with the English cases. Thus, where the master and owner of a ship steals a package out of several packages de livered him to carry, without removing any thing from the particular package; 1 Russ. & R. 92; or where a letter-carrier is in trusted with two. directed envelopes, each containing a 5/. note, and delivers the en velopes, having previously taken out the two notes; 1 Den. Cr. Cas. 215; or where a drover separates one sheep from a flock in trusted to him to drive a certain distance; 1 Jebb. 51; this is not a breaking of bulk sufficient to terminate the bailment and to constitute larceny; 2 Bish. Cr. L. 860, 868. The Larceny Act of 1861 has met the diffi culty of deciding this class of cases in Eng land, by providing that a bailee of any chat tel, money, or valuable security, who fraud ulently takes the same, although not break ing bulk, shall be guilty of larceny.