374 VICIOUS AXD FEROCIOUS A>;IMALS. 



long course of the ages the Master of Rolls appears to think 

 the elephant may attain the same high level, but till he has 

 done so it matters not what progress he makes abroad. The 

 result is doubtless right enough, though the reasoning is not 

 altogether clear. However domesticated the whole race of 

 elephants might become in India, it seems that this would 

 make no difference in their legal credit here until members of 

 the race had actually been born and for many generations do- 

 mesticated in England. Conversely the English cow, and 

 probably even the English sheep, ought upon their introduc- 

 tion into a new country to be treated as retaining the savage 

 character of their distant ancestry. These animals might join 

 the elephant in saying that such a doctrine was hardly in ac- 

 cordance with the comity of nations."^ 



As was said in the case last cited the defendant is liable "un- 

 less the person to whom the injury is done brings it on him- 

 self." So in Besozzi v. Harris, supra, it was said, "If the 

 plaintiff, with knowledge that the bear was there, put herself 

 in a position to receive the injury, she could not recover." 

 This question of contributory negligence will be discussed in 

 the next section. 



The rule above stated has been held to apply tO' other cases 

 than those of animals ferce natures. Thus where a bull breaks 

 into the field of its owner's neighbor and gores his horse till 

 it dies, this creates a liability in trespass quare clausum fregit 

 to pay for the horse. "Injuries committed by bulls on horses 

 occur so frequently that it is difficult to avoid coming to the 

 conclusion that every owner of a bull ought to be held an- 

 swerable in an action of trespass for his bull in killing or 

 injuring when running at large, either by his negligence or 

 permission, the horse of another, though it be the first offense 

 of the kind that the animal has ever been known to commit." ® 



° 34 Sol. Jour. 596. 



• Dolph V. Ferris, 7 W. & S. (Pa.) 367. And see Mason v. Morgan, 

 24 U. C. Q. B. 328; Burke :;. Daley, 32 111. App. 326. 



Cf. Clark v. Armstrong, 24 D. (Sc. Ct. Sess.) 1315, cited in § 93, infra. 



