INJUKIES TO TRESPASSIN-G ANIMALS. 141 



is not liable for their loss, where the owner has been notified 

 to take care of them.^^^ The rule is otherwise where the land- 

 owner is responsible by his negligence for the trespass."*^ 

 And he cannot wantonly drive the animals to a distance. 

 AVhen he does so he becomes a trespasser ab initio}^' Where 

 he has no right to inclose them on his own premises and, in at- 

 tempting to do so, injures them, he must respond in dam- 

 ages."* 



46. Unlicensed and Bangerous Animals; Police Power The 



legislature by virtue of its police power may authorize a city 

 ordinance that dangerous animals may be destroyed by city 

 authorities without notice to the owner and no liability for 

 loss is thereby created. ^^^ And a law is constitutional that 

 authorizes a justice to inake an ex parte order requiring the 

 owner of a vicious dog to kih it immediately and provides 

 that, on his refusing to do so within forty-eight hours, he shall 

 forfeit a certain sum.^^° Statutes and ordinances regulating 

 the licensing, collaring and muzzling of dogs and the shoot- 

 ing of the animal if they are not conformed to, are very com- 

 mon. In Massachusetts any one may kill an unlicensed or an 

 uncollared dog, whenever or wherever found, provided he 

 can do so without a trespass and every police officer and con- 

 stable shall kill such dog;^^^ and the constable may peaceably 



"" Story V. Robinson, 32 Cal. 205 



"'Roby V. Reed, 39 N. H. 461; Morse v. Glover (N. H.), 40 Atl. Rep. 

 396. And see Carruthers v. HoIHs, 8 A. & E. 113. 



'" Gilson V. Fisk, 8 N. H. 404. And see Knott v. Digges, 6 Har. & J. 

 (Md.) 230; Knour v. Wagoner, supra; Tobin v. Deal, 60 Wis. 87, cited in 

 § 79, infra. 



As to his liability for the act of his agent see Burnett v. Oechsner 

 (Tex.), so S. W. Rep. 562. 



"' Harris v. Brummell, 74 Mo. App. 433. 



"° Leach v. Elwood, 3 111. App. 453; Blair v. Forehand, 100 Mass. 136; 

 Jenkins v. Ballantyne, 8 Utah 245. 



But see Lynn v. State, 33 Tex. Cr. 153; Peo. v. Tighe, 9 Misc. (N. Y.) 

 607. 



'"" Peo. V. Gillespie, 25 N. Y. App. Div. 91. 



™ Jlorewood v. Wakefield, 133 Mass. 240. 



