OWNERSHIP OF ANIMALS 247 
A defendant who sold a horse, giving false pedi- 
gree, showed that he could not read, and he be- 
lieved that the pedigree made out by others was 
true. The horse had passed through several hands, 
and there were many horses of that pedigree in 
the neighborhood. A verdict was returned that 
he was not guilty of fraud.5? The Revised Stat- 
utes of Maine prohibited the sale of animals in- 
fected with tuberculosis. A sold oxen to B, tak- 
ing B’s note therefor. The oxen died of tubercu- 
losis. A sued for the collection of the note, but 
the court held that he could not recover if the 
cattle were infected when they were sold.*# 
An executory contract for the future delivery of 
cattle of which the seller is not then the owner is 
not void as a wagering of contract, where the par- 
ties intend an actual delivery and acceptance.*! 
197. Ownership of Increase. According to the 
common law the ownership of the increase belongs 
to the owner of the mother,®® in the absence of 
contract or agreement to the contrary ** (except 
in the case of swans, etc.). Thus, in the replevin of 
a mare and three colts, the ownership of the mare 
was held to carry with it the ownership of the colts 
which were conceded to be her offspring.°” The 
fact that one paid taxes on the mare, and paid 
service fees, and expenses of rearing her colts, 
52 People v. Umlauf, 88 Mich. 55 Stanfield v. Stiltz, 93 Ind. 
274, 50 N. W. 251. 249; Arkansas Val. L., etc., Co. 
53 Church v. Knowles, 101 v. Mann, 130 U. S. 69. 
Me. 264, 63 Atl. 1042. 56 First Nat. Bank v. Eich- 
54 Fletcher v. Jacob Dold meier, 153 Iowa 154, 133 N. W. 
Packing Co., 58 N. Y. 8. 612; 454. 
affirmed 169 N. Y. 571, 61 N. 57 Dunning vy. Crofutt, 81 
E. 1129. Conn. 101, 70 Atl. 630. 
