188 THEFT AND REMOVAL OF ANIMALS. 



be pleaded. Where one drove from his own pasture into the 

 highway another's cow and notified a field-driver to impound 

 it, after the owner had failed to remove it on notice, the 

 former was held not liable for the conversion. ^^^ 



If the owner of a horse, which has been sold without au- 

 thority by his bailee, forcibly enters the premises of the pur- 

 chaser and takes the horse, he commits a trespass.^'^* But, 

 without a previous demand, he may bring an action against 

 such a purchaser, though a bona fide one, for conversion. ^'^'^ 



Where the plaintiff had only a possessory right to animals 

 and they strayed voluntarily on the defendant's premises and 

 the latter merely permitted them to remain there till they 

 were carried off by soldiers, it was held that he was not liable 

 in trespass for their taking and carrying away.^^* 



A stranger's horses tied on the premises are not distrain- 

 able for rent, if in actual use at the time of the distress,^''^ nor 

 are animals of which no view has been had or which, after 

 view, have gone out of the lord's fee, unless they have been 

 driven out by the tenant.^*" And, under a law exempting 

 certain property from forced sale in order to secure to each 

 family a means of support, it was held that the words "two 

 horses" would include geldings, mares or mules.^^^ So the 

 word "horse" in an exemption law has been held to include 

 an ass'*^ and an unbroken colt.^*^ 



The measure of damages where a horse or working animal 

 is unlawfully taken and detained is not merely its value but 

 the value of its use during the time of detention, when that 

 exceeds legal interest.^** 



"° Bonney v. Smith, 121 Mass. 155. 



"' Salisbury v. Green, 17 R. I. 758— wrongful taking from the owner's 

 possession and fresh pursuit not being shown. 

 "' Gilmore v. Newton, 9 Allen (Mass.) 171. 

 "' Pope V. Cordell, 47 Mo. 251. 

 "' Couch V. Crawford, 10 U. C. C. P. 491. 

 '™ Co. Litt. 161 a. "'Allison v. Brookshire, 38 Tex. 199. 

 "' Richardson v. Duncan, 2 Heisk. (Tenn.) 220. 

 "»= Hall V. Miller (Tex. Civ. App.), 51 S. W. Rep. 36. 

 "' Hartley State Bank v. McCorkell (la.), 60 N. W. Rep. 197, where it 



