1/6 BREAKING AND TRAINING 



injured animal has to be destroyed. In this case is 

 the breaker responsible ? Most certainly the author 

 would say yes ! No more negligent act could be 

 performed than that involved in turning another 

 person's horse amongst strange horses which are out 

 at grass, and the tempers of which the new animal 

 cannot reasonably be expected to be acquainted 

 with. 



Should the owner be a consenting party to an act 

 of this kind, then, of course, the whole matter would 

 wear a different complexion. Let us now proceed 

 to our second division of responsibilities and consider 

 the horse breaker's liability in relation to any damage 

 which may occur to other persons, or property belong- 

 ing to such persons through the action of an animal 

 in his keeping. It may be accepted as a fairly settled 

 point of law that in case of any damage arising from 

 an animal known to he vicious, the owner of such an 

 animal must be held responsible. 



Take, however, the case of a vicious horse which is 

 sent to a breaker to be tamed. We fail to see that 

 in these circumstances any claim could be made upon 

 the owner should some accident occur either to persons 

 or property through the agency of this said animal. 



