TO WHAT OWNERS THE COMPANY IS LIABLE. 667 



fences between adjoining owners, for neglect of which only 

 an adjoining owner may complain." ®* 



In Ohio, also, the company's duty to fence is not confined to 

 adjoining owners but extends to the public generally.'*' The 

 same rule exists in Indiana,^" Wisconsin,"! and Kansas.^^ 



In Maine the statutory obligation of the company to fence 

 IS limited to the owners of stock rightfully on the adjoining 

 land, and the owner of a runaway horse which ran into a mu- 

 nicipal park and was killed on a track running through the 

 park was not allowed to recover."^ 



In New Hampshire, too, the company, is compelled to 

 fence only as against animals rightfully on the adjoining 

 land.®* This is also the rule in Vermont, ®^ and in Nevada.'^" 



In Oklahoma the company is liable for failure tO' fence only 

 to an abutting owner who has constructed a fence on all sides 

 of the land, except on the right of way, and has notified the 

 company to erect one there.*'' 



"Gillam V. Sioux City & St. P. R. Co., 26 Minn. 268. 



"" Pittsburg, C. & St. L. R. Co. v. Allen, 40 O. St. 206; Marietta & C. 

 R. Co. V. Stephenson, 24 id. 48. 



" Indianapolis & C. R. Co. v. Townsend, 10 Ind. 38. 



See Cine, W. & M. R. Co. v. Stanley (Ind. App.), 27 N. E. Rep. 316. 



■^McCall V. Chamberlain, 13 Wis. 637; Curry v. Chic. & N. R. Co., 

 43 id. 665, 



""Mo. Pac. R. Co. V. Roads, 33 Kan. 640. 



" Allen V. Boston & M. R. Co., 87 Me. 326,— on the ground that the 

 animal was not rightfully in the park, even though the owner exercised 

 great care to prevent its escape. 



" Morse v. Boston & L. R. Co., 66 N. H. 148; Giles v. Boston & M. 

 R. Co., ss id. SS2; Mayberry v. Concord R. Co., 47 id. 391; Cornwall 

 V. Sullivan R. Co., 28 id. 161; Woolson v. Northern R. Co., 19 id. 267. 



The company is not liable for the killing of an animal escaping from 

 the highway: Woolson v. Northern R. Co., 19 N. H. 267; Towns v. 

 Cheshire R. Co., 21 id. 363. 



■" Smith V. Barre R. Co., 64 Vt. 21; Bemis v. Conn. & P. R. R. Co., 

 42 id. 375; Morse v. Rutland & B. R. Co., 27 id. 49; Jackson v. Same, 

 25 id. ISO. 



-Walsh V. Virginia & T. R. Co., 8 Nev. no. 



" McCook V. Bryan (Okla), 46 Pac. Rep. 506. 



