ORAL ARGUMENT OF CHRISTOPHER ROBINSON, Q. C. 597 



to discuss this questiou upou tlic principles of muiiicipai Jaw wliich 

 tliey say apply to it, and which they say distinguish it from all other ani- 

 mals feroe natnrcv, which they say make it a domestic animal; and if it 

 is to be a domestic auimal I venture to say that it must be a domestic 

 animal by its nature. I have had this difficulty also, that in some 

 parts of my learned friends' argument I find statements from which I 

 should gather that they claim it to be a domestic animal by nature, 

 and in others I find statements wliich go to show that their argument 

 is that it is a domestic animal made so by them, although a wild ani- 

 mal originally. One thing I think is clear, that unless it is a domestic 

 animal by nature they certainly have not made it one; and I think 

 they are driven back in some portions of their argument. 



Lord Hannen. — What is a domestic animal by nature*? 



Mr. Robinson. — I can say nothing more than it is a domestic animal 

 by nature. I hardly know how to describe it, except that I would say 

 that it is an auimal which has a domestic nature. Lord Hanueu will 

 remember the question that was once asked, what was an archdeacon, 

 and it was said he was a person who performed archdiaconal functions. 

 I really do not know that I can say what is a domestic animal by nature, 

 except by saying it is what we recognize as such. 



Lord Hannen. — You seemed to be relying on the distinction, and 

 therefore I wanted to know what you meant. 



Mr. Robinson. — If Lord Hannen asks me my opinion I can say at 

 once that I think there is a plain distinction between an animal which 

 is a domestic animal by nature and an animal which has been tempo- 

 rarily brought within the class of domestic animals by reason of the 

 industry or art of man exercised upon it. 



There is just this difference: That a domestic animal proper remains 

 a domestic animal forever, and must remain a domestic animal for- 

 ever; it was born so, and must die so; but an animal that has been 

 tamed and reclaimed belongs to the class of domestic animals only so 

 long as it retains that nature. If that animal should escape and 

 regains its wild nature then it relapses into the class of wild animals. 



The President. — Do you regard the bee as a reclaimed animal or 

 as a domestic animal? 



Mr. Robinson. — I should say when the bee is hived and reclaimed, 

 as they put it, then it would be a reclaimed animal. You get your 

 property in bees, as Bracton says, by reason of occupation and hiving. 

 If that occupation and hiving has been such as to give you a property, 

 it is because you have reclaimed it. 



The President. — Then the bee, you think, is an anivaalfercenaturce. 



Mr. Robinson. — I should say it was originally a wild animal, but 

 when you come to hive them and conilne them, you make them for the 

 time tame. That is you bring them into that class. " 



The President. — The reclaiming is the hiving? 



Mr. Robinson. — The reclaiming is the hiving and confining. Yes, 

 sir. 



The President. — Confining? 



Mr. Robinson. — Confining it in the hive. I will not say confining, 

 because it is perhaps hardly a proper expression to be used. 



Lord Hannen. — Homing. 



Mr. LioBiNSON. — Homing; yes sir. Of course you have the power 

 of confining them, as my learned friends say. 



The President. — Putting them into the hive. 



Mr. Robinson. — Putting them in the hive, and their coming back to 

 the hive and living in the hive, and your providing shelter, food, etc. 



