LAWS RELATING TO DOGS. 313 



not exceeding "fifty, nor less than thirty, pounds; together also 

 with the charges, 



No dog to be liable to the duty until six months old. 



Nov. 1780. Johnson v. Overall. The declaration stated, 

 that the defendant discharged a certain gun loaded with gun- 

 powder and bullets, and shot a certain dog of the plaintiff. The 

 defence was, that only four sorts of dogs are in law of any value, 

 and those specified. Dog in the declaration not specified, and 

 therefore did not appear of any value. Plaintiff nonsuited. 



To an action of trespass for killing plaintiff's dog, the defen- 

 dant may plead, that the dog chased the rabbits in his warren, 

 or the deer in his park ; but not that he chased a hare into de- 

 fendant's land. 2 Morg. 265. 



A dog is such a creature as a man may have a property in, 

 and an action has been brought for taking a hound, and the 

 plaintiff recovered. The like of a bloodhound, greyhound, poin- 

 ter, setter, spaniel, and lurcher. 



If a person hunt upon the ground of another, such other 

 person cannot justify killing of his dogs ; as appears by 2 Roll. 

 Abr. 567. But this has been over-ruled; and in the case of 

 Wadhurst v. Damme, Cro. Jac. 44. it was held, that a warrener 

 may justify killing a mastiff dog in the warren pursuing the 

 conies, to prevent his destroying them. So, if a dog run after 

 deer in a park. 3 Lev. 28. 



It is no justification in trespass for killing a mastiff, that he 

 run violently upon the defendant's dog and bit him ; but the 

 defendant should state further, that he could not otherwise sepa- 

 rate the mastiff from his dog. 1 Saund. 84. 



And a man may justify an assault in defence of his dog. 

 Cro. Ehz. 125. 



And delivery of a dog will be a good consideration for an 

 as sump fit. Ibid. Owen. 93. 



It having been once made known to the owner that his dog 

 2 D 



