THE DOG AS THE SUBJECT OF LARCENY. 59 



21. The Dog as the Subject of Larceny; Dogs as a Source of 

 Evidence in Criminal Actions — As has been stated, the dog was 

 not the subject of larceny at the common law. A fortiori one 

 cannot be convicted of obtaining a dog by false pretences.^'' 

 Whether under the changed views of modern times a dog 

 is now the subject of larceny apart from statute or under gen- 

 eral words in a statute, is a question which has been much dis- 

 cussed.*^ In a New York case where it was held that a dog 

 came within the term "personal property" in a statute pun- 

 ishing larceny, it is said : "The reason generally assigned by 

 common law writers for this rule as to stealing dogs is the 

 baseness of their nature and the fact that they were kept for 

 the mere whim and pleasure of their owners. When we call 

 to mind the small spaniel that saved the life of William of 

 Orange and thus probably changed the current of modern 

 history (2 Motley's Dutch Republic, 398), and the faithful 

 St. Bernards which, after a storm has swept over the crests 

 and sides of the Alps, start out in search of lost travellers, the 

 claim that the nature of a dog is essentially base and that he 

 should be left a prey to every vagabond who chooses to steal 

 him will not now receive ready assent. In nearly every 

 household in the land can be found chattels kept for the mere 

 whim and pleasure of the owner, a source of solace after seri- 

 ous labor, exercising a refining and elevating influence, and 

 yet they are as much under the protection of the law as 

 chattels purely useful and absolutely essential. This common 

 law rule was extremely technical and can scarcely be said to 

 have had a sound basis to rest on. . . . The artificial reason- 

 ings upon which these rules were based are wholly inapplic- 

 able to modern society. Tempora mutantur et leges mutantur 

 in illis. Large amounts of money are now invested in dogs. 



" Reg. V. Robinson, 28 L. J. M. C. 58. 



See also, on the subject of this section, 40 L. R. A. 514 n. 



" See Straker's essay on Larceny of Dogs (Detroit, 1893), in which the 

 author concludes that dogs are not the subject of larceny unaided by 

 statute. See § 22, infra. 



