156 ESSENTIALS OF VETERINARY LAW 
harmed, and incites them to keep the existence 
of the disease secret so long as possible. Policy 
therefore dictates that the community share with 
the owner his loss, by paying to him a portion of 
the value of the animal. 
When the disease is one from which the major- 
ity of the patients will recover, while there can 
be no question as to the right of the community 
to institute a strict quarantine, there may be con- 
siderable doubt as to its right to destroy the stock 
without compensation, and this compensation may 
be much closer to the original value of the stock. 
Although the keeping of an animal afflicted with 
an infectious disease is not per se culpable, still 
under police power the owner might be compelled 
to bear the expense of such reasonable quarantine 
as might be ordered. Under police power we 
sometimes require high licenses, to help pay for 
the supervision of the business, and we require 
owners of dairies to go to the expense of erecting 
sanitary barns, and milkhouses equipped with ex- 
pensive machinery. On the other hand, if the 
owner of the diseased animal shall be so negligent 
as to permit the spread of the disease to the stock 
of others he will be held liable for the injury thus 
sustained. (§§ 112, 211.) Through the negligence 
of one man an entire community may be seriously 
damaged. Under police power the community 
may demand that the man who insists upon keep- 
ing his diseased animals must insure the com- 
munity against possible damage. It would there- 
fore seem that the community would have a per- 
fect right, by means of proper legislative action, 
to require that the owner of stock which was 
