418 VICIOUS AND FEROCIOUS ANIMALS. 



determined that the bigger dog killed more sheep.^^^ The 

 plaintiff cannot recover for the aggravation of his wound by 

 improper surgical treatment.^^* 



Though a statute imposes on a town the duty of paying 

 damages for sheep killed by dogs, the law will not imply a 

 contract to do it, there being no consideration therefor.^^* 

 Where the statute charged the owner of such a dog with the 

 amount of damage done as fixed by the selectmen of the 

 town, without an opportunity of being heard, it was held so 

 far unconstitutional.^^^ Otherwise where the statute implies 

 that if the matter is not settled without suit, the fact of the 

 injury and the amount of damages are to be determined in 

 other suits for which provision is made.^^^ 



'" Wilbur V. Hubbard, 35 Barb. (N. Y.) 303. 



-" Moss V. Pardridge, 9 III. App. 490. 



''" Davis V. Seymour, 59 Conn. 531. 



A town paying such damages succeeds to the rights of the owner and 

 may, by statute, maintain a joint action against the owners of the dogs: 

 Fairchild v. Rich (Vt.), 34 Atl. Rep. 692. 



""' East Kingston v. Towle, 48 N. H. 57. 



'" Wilton V. Weston, 48 Conn. 325. 



