228 INJURIES TO ANIMALS ON HIGHWAYS. 



of Sunday not suspending such duty.^*® But the owner of 

 property adjoining the highway was held to have a right to 

 the temporary use of a reasonable portion of the street for 

 the deposit of material used in plastering his house, and the 

 village permitting this was held not liable for the fright of 

 horses caused thereby, though the material was of a character 

 to frighten horses of ordinary gentleness. ^*'^ 



In Canada it has been held that, where the bad state of the 

 road is due to proprietors or lessees, the municipality is not 

 responsible for a resulting runaway.^*^ Otherwise, where the 

 excavation of a new tunnel was carelessly filled, whereby an 

 axle broke by reason of a flaw unknown to the plaintifif and 

 the horse ran away and was hurt.^*^ And where a runaway 

 was caused by a sleigh being caught in the defendant's track, 

 elevated above the road-bed of the street, the defendant was 

 held liable.^^** Where the object causing fright was left 

 over night on the highway unguarded and unlighted and 

 some of the town councillors knew of the fact, it was held 

 that, under the circumstances, there was not sufficient notice 

 or a sufificient lapse of time to impose liability upon the cor- 

 poration.^^' And a municipal corporation is not responsible 

 for damages resulting from a horse taking fright at railway 

 ties piled, without the authority of the corporation, on the 

 untravelled portion of a highway: the person who piled the 

 ties is liable.^'*^ 



The weight of authority in these cases is, therefore, opposed 

 to the Massachusetts doctrine on the reasonable ground that 



"° Bloor V. Delafield, 69 Wis. 273. 



"' Loberg v. Amherst, 87 Wis. 634. 



"' O'Neil V. Quebec, 16 Low. Can. 404. Nor where it is due to a con- 

 tractor, though the municipality may have otherwise neghgently allowed 

 the highway to get out of repair, unless the assent of the latter can be 

 shown: Howarth v. McGugan, 23 Ont. 396. 



"° Archambault v. Montreal, 2 Leg. News (Can.) 141. 



"° Coristine v. Montreal City Pass. R. Co., 3 Leg. News (Can.) 229. 



"" Rice V. Whitby 25 Ont. App. 191, reversing 28 Ont. 598. 



"= O'Neil V. Windham. 24 Ont. App. 341, following Maxwell v. Clarke. 

 4 id. 460. And see McDonald v. Dickenson, 24 id. 31. ■" 



