ACCIDENTAL INJURIES TO TRESPASSING ANIMALS. 149 



prescription to maintain a fence and one to whom he sold 

 fallage of timber cut a tree in such a way as to make a gap in 

 the fence without the owner's knowledge, and the plaintiff's 

 cattle went through and fed on the leaves of a yew tree that 

 had been felled by the owner of the fallage, it was held that 

 the land-owner was liable for the loss of the cattle.^** And a 

 burial board was held liable for the poisoning of a horse by 

 eating the leaves of a yew tree growing over into the plain- 

 tiff's meadow, and it was not material whether they knew 

 that yew leaves were poisonous to cattle or not, as, in either 

 case, they must be held responsible for their own act in origi- 

 nally planting the trees. Nor was the plaintiff bound to ex- 

 amine all the boundaries of his hired field to see that no injuri- 

 ous tree was projecting over them.^*® No warranty, 

 however, can be implied on the part of the lessor of land let 

 for agricultural purposes that there are no plants likely to be 

 injurious to cattle, such as yew trees, growing on the land.^*" 



A declaration that the plaintiff's horses were poisoned by 

 yew clippings from the defendant's trees must disclose facts 

 from which the defendant's duty to take care of the clippings 

 could be inferred ; otherwise it is bad.^®^ 



Where the defendants were obliged to fence land for the 

 benefit of the lessor and his tenants (among whom was the 

 plaintiff), and strands from the wire fence fell down, as the 

 result of long exposure, and the plaintiff's cow while grazing 

 swallowed one of the pieces and died, it was held that the de- 

 fendants were liable in damages.^*^ 



Where a confectioner placed poisoned cheese behind his 



then, make any difference that a yew tree is likely to tempt a horse to 

 trespass? I think not, unless it were proved that it was put or kept there 

 for the purpose of enticing the animal to its destruction." 



"° Lawrence v. Jenkins, L. R. 8 Q. B. 274. 



"° Crowhurst v. Amersham Burial Board, 4 Ex. D. S- 



"" Erskine v. Adeane, L. R. 8 Ch. 756. 



'" Wilson V. Newberry, L. R. 7 Q. B. 31. 



'"" Firth V. Bowling Iron Co., 3 C. P. D. 254. And see the article in 

 22 Sol. Journ. 719, quoted in § 42, supra. 



