INJURIES TO TRESPASSIXG ANIMALS. 137 



ered for the loss of the dog.*^ In another case, dangerous 

 traps baited with flesh were placed in a wood near a highway, 

 and it was held that an action lay for an injury to dogs 

 thereby, Lord Ellenborough saying: "It appears by the evi- 

 dence reported that the traps were placed so near to the plain- 

 tiff's courtyard where his dogs were kept, that they might 

 scent the bait without committing any trespass on the defend- 

 ant's wood. Every man must be taken to contemplate the 

 probable consequences of the act he does." ^° But in a later 

 case where the facts were veiy similar tO' those in Deane v. 

 Clayton, supra, a plea that the defendant set the dog-spear 

 for the purpose of preserving his game and disabling dogs, 

 whereof the plaintiff had notice, was held good even if there 

 had been no allegation of notice and the fact that the dog ran 

 off against his master's will was held immaterial.^^ And 

 placing poisoned flesh in an enclosed garden for the purpose 

 of destroying a dog which was in the habit of straying there 

 was held not to come within the words "unlawfully and ma- 

 liciously kill, maim or wound ;" ^^ so it is not unlawful to set 

 a trap in a garden to catch cats trespassing there.®* 



But in a Connecticut case the English rule that where the 

 owner of land places spring-guns, etc., on an enclosure, con- 

 cealed in order to wound and kill any man or animal coming 

 on the place, he is justified, on giving proper notice, in inflict- 

 ing the injury on trespassers — was disapproved of, and it was 

 held that scattering poison within one's enclosure for the pur- 

 pose of poisoning another's fowls, if they should come there, 

 was unjustifiable, though notice should be given to the owner, 

 and that the latter might recover for the consequent killing.®* 

 So one putting poison where he may reasonably anticipate 

 that another's dog will get it is liable for its death, and all the 



" Deane v. Clayton, 7 Taunt. 489. 



°° Townsend v. Wathen, 9 East. 277. 



" Jordin v. Crump, 8 M. & W. 782. 



" Daniel v. Janes, 2 C. P. D. 351. 



" Bryan v. Eaton, 40 J. P. 213. 



"Johnson v. Patterson, 14 Conn. i. See Smith v. Williams, infra. 



