290 STATE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE. 



neighbor, or whose cellar was invaded by the filth of his neighbor's privy, or 

 whose habitation was made unhealthy by the fumes and noisome vapors of his 

 neighbor's alkali works, was said to be damaged without any fault of his own, 

 and it was no more than reasonable and just that the neighbor, who had 

 brought something on his own premises which was not naturally there, harm- 

 less to others so long as it was confined to his own property, but which he 

 knew to be mischievous if it got on his neighbor's premises, should be obliged 

 to make good the damages which ensued if he does not succeed in confining 

 it to his own premises or under his own control ; and it made no difference 

 whether the things so brought were beasts, or water, or filth, or stenches, or 

 any other thing which he knew to be mischievous. 



The owner of cattle was bound, at his peril, to restrain them from trespass- 

 ing upon the lands of his neighbor; and, if he neglected to do so, he was not 

 only precluded from recovering damages for any injury which the cattle might 

 sustain by going upon the lands of others, but he was himself liable to make 

 compensation for the trespass committed by his cattle. 



In a recent case in Maryland, where an ox escaped from his owner and got 

 on the track of a railroad, by means of which a train was wrecked and great 

 damage ensued, the Court of Appeals of that jState held that the owner of 

 the ox was liable for all the damages. This old rule of the common law is 

 subject to some limitations. Your fire, by which you cook your daily meal, 

 is known to you to be liable to consume not only your own but your neighbor's 

 house, if it escapes your control. Your reservoir of water may break away 

 by some overwhelming flood, and deluge your neighbor's field. Your horses 

 may become frightened and break into your neighbor's enclosure or injure 

 your neighbor's property. The old rule has therefore been somewhat modi- 

 fied, so that, when the injury is unavoidable and your conduct in the matter 

 free from blame, you will not be liable. 



Injuries arising from extraordinary or accidental circumstances, for which 

 no one is at fault, must be borne by those on whom the injury falls. Accord- 

 ingly it was held by the Supreme Court of New Hampshire that when a 

 person whose horse, frightened by a locomotive, became uncontrollable, ran 

 away with him, went upon the land of another and did serious injury to the 

 other's property, he is not liable for the damage if it was not caused by any 

 fault on his part ; the court saying that, if in the prosecution of a lawful act, 

 a casuality purely accidental arises, no action can be supported for any injury 

 arising therefrom. So where one, making a friendly call upon his neighbor 

 who kept several swarms of bees, hitched his horse at the front gate, and 

 while in the house engaged in conversation with the neighbor, the bees attacked 

 the horse in vast numbers and stung it so that it died, it was held that the 

 owner of the bees was not liable. 



It is an important element in the matter that you liave knowledge of the 

 dangerous character or mischevious propensity of the thing or animal intro- 

 duced or kept by you. The natural consequences of the escape must be 

 known; the natural consequences of the escape of your cattle and other tame 

 beasts, as the eating and trampling down of grass, corn, oats and other crops. 

 The damage arising from the escape of filth and stenches are matters of 

 universal knowledge of which everybody is presumed to be cognizant, and of 

 which everybody is bound to take notice. Since you are bound to know those 

 things, the law presumes that you know them, and holds you responsible if 

 any damage arises from any fault or negligence of yours. But all tame animals 

 are not vicious. The goring of a man is not the ordinary consequence of the 



