334 



FEEOCIOUS AND VICIOUS ANIMALS. 



Evidence of 

 mischieYOus 

 propensit)' 

 unnecessary 

 under 28 & 29 

 Vict. i;. 60. 



"Cattle" 

 includes horses 

 and mares. 



Proof of 

 ownership. 



The Dogs 

 Act, 1871. 



was in the habit of hunting game on its own account, and 

 in a peculiarly destructive manner, a fact known to the 

 defendant, who also knew that the plaintiff preserved 

 game {d). 



In the case of injury by a dog to sheep or cattle, evidence 

 of a mischievous propensity of the dog or of the owner's 

 knowledge thereof is rendered unnecessary by the 28 & 29 

 Vict. c. 60 ; and the Act also simplifies in such cases the 

 proof of the ownership of the dog. 



By sect. 1, "the owner of every dog shall be liable in 

 damages for injury done to any cattle or sheep by his dog, 

 and it shall not be necessary for the party seeking such 

 damages to show a previous mischievous propensity in such 

 dog, or the owner's knowledge of such previous propensity, 

 or that the injury was attributable to neglect on the part 

 of the owner." The word " cattle " in this section includes 

 horses and mares {e). 



By sect. 2, " The occupier of any house or premises, 

 where any dog was kept or permitted to live or remain at 

 the time of such injury, shall be deemed to be the owner 

 of such dog, and shall be liable as such, unless the said 

 occupier can prove that he was not the owner of such dog 

 at the time the injury complained of was committed, and 

 that such dog was kept or permitted to live or remain in 

 the said house or premises without his sanction or know- 

 ledge ; provided always, that where there are more occu- 

 piers than one in any house or premises, let in separate 

 apartments or lodgings or otherwise, the occupier of that 

 particular part of the premises in which such dogs shall 

 have been kept or permitted to live or remain at the time of 

 such injury shall be deemed to be the owner of such dog." 



Sect. 1 of the 34 & 35 Vict. c. 56 (The Dogs Act, 1871), 

 provides that any police officer may take possession of any 

 dog that he has reason to suppose to be savage or dangerous 

 straying on any highway, and not under the control of any 

 person, and may detain such dog until the owner has 

 claimed the same, and paid all expenses incurred by reason of 

 such detention. By sect. 2, any Court of Summary Jurisdic- 

 tion may take cognizance of a complaint that a dog is danger- 

 ous, and not kept under proper control, and if it appears to 

 the Court having cognizance of such complaint that such a dog 



[d) Read v. Edwards, 11 L. T., 

 N. S. 311. 



[e) Wright v. Pearson, L. E., 4 



Q. B. 582 ; 38 L. J., Q. B. 312 ; 20 

 L. T., N. S. 849 ; 17 W. E. 1099. 



