264 ESSENTIALS OF VETERINARY LAW 



much stronger than that dividing two meadows. 

 On the other hand, animals simply driven along 

 the highway have neither time nor opportunity 

 for discovering any but very apparent weaknesses 

 in the enclosing structure. 



These general rules must often be altered to suit 

 the locality or other conditions. Where cattle are 

 permitted legally to wander upon the range, clear- 

 ly every man must protect his own grain by fences. 

 By agreement it is customary for the owners of 

 adjacent property to unite in building line fences, 

 or to agree that one shall keep up a certain por- 

 tion, and the other another portion. This agree- 

 ment should include a statement of the purposes 

 for which it is erected. A fence which is entirely 

 sufiQcient as a line fence would be improper for 

 the restraint of animals ; and a fence w^hich would 

 be good for horses would not restrain hogs, or if 

 built for hogs it might not restrain cattle or horses. 



A man is liable for the trespass of his animals 

 through that portion of the line fence which it is 

 his duty to keep up, without regard to the char- 

 acter of his neighbor's portion.*^ But, an owner 

 of property cannot recover for trespass when the 

 trespass was due to his own negligence, as in a 

 failure to keep his portion of the fence in repair.'*^ 



** Every unwarrantable entry by a person or his 

 cattle on the land of another is a trespass, and a 

 person is equally^ answerable for the trespass 

 of his cattle as of himself. "^° Where cattle 



48Cooley, Torts, 399. v. Balzer, 47 Barb. 562; Duf- 



49 Carpenter v. Cook, 67 Vt. fees v. Judd, 48 Iowa, 256. 



102, 30 Atl. 998; Weide v, so Am. & Eng. Enc. of Law 



Thiel, 9 111. App. 223; Cowles (2nd Ed.), 345. 



