234 ESSENTIALS OF VETERINARY LAW 
full amount of the injuries inflicted. Where a 
small dog joined with a hound in chasing sheep, 
and participated throughout to the best of his 
ability, his owner was liable, though the hound 
reached the sheep first and inflicted the more seri- 
ous wounds.!® Any one may kill a mad dog, or 
one supposed to be mad, or exposed to the infec- 
tion,?° but there must be good and sufficient reason 
for so considering the animal. This rule would 
not justify the killing of a dog just because he may 
possibly have been exposed to the danger, or be- 
cause he may have chanced to bite a person or 
another animal. There is no universal rule which 
will hold the owner of a dog liable for biting either 
person or other animal.?1_ The dog may have been 
worried, or it may have been moved with some sud- 
den and unexpected emotion, though habitually 
quiet and good natured. Or the animal may have 
been within his legal rights, as where a dog kept 
to protect an automobile bites a person attempting 
to get into the rig, or to take something from it, 
or when a watch dog bites a trespasser upon prop- 
erty. 
190. Ownership of Animals—How Obtained. A 
property right in animals may be acquired by pur- 
chase, by gift, by inheritance, by finding and cap- 
ture, or by natural increase. Animals ferae na- 
turae may become property by capture and sub- 
jugation, including killing. Property acquired by 
inheritance is a matter of record in probate pro- 
19 Johnson v. Lewis, 151 Wis. 21 Kelley v. Tillourey, 81 
615, 139 N. W. 377. Conn. 320, 70 Atl. 1031. 
20 Brent v. Kimball, 60 TU. 
211. 
