THE AMATEUR AND HORTICULTURAL LAW. 



33 



provided it can be shown that the damage threatened is substantial 

 and such as could be reasonably contemplated. This involves really the 

 question of "degree." The law would not interfere when a man keeps a 

 few pigeons (de minimis non curat lex), but might possibly do so when 

 such vast numbers were kept as to involve a legal nuisance, especially if 

 they were not supplied by the owner with sufficient food. There is at all 

 events one decided case where a man was restrained from so overstocking 

 his land with game as seriously to damage his neighbour's crops. The 

 above remarks with regard to pigeons may possibly also apply to tame 

 rabbits, but one is naturally reluctant to indulge in prophecy as to what 

 view the Court might take at the present day. 



Stray animals which trespass and are caught doing damage " red- 

 handed," or "damage feasant," as the law terms it, can be impounded ; 

 but the right to impound gives only a lien on the animal, and so far as 

 pigeons are concerned it is to be feared that even the most active of 

 gardeners might find considerable difficulty in impounding the culprit. 

 Animals trespassing may be entrapped by merciful means, but may not 

 be killed (a case to the contrary effect having been questioned by later 

 authorities), though perhaps if a gardener were to see a pigeon doing 

 considerable damage, and happened to have an air-gun handy, he would 

 not stay to consider his legal rights, especially if he felt assured that the 

 owner of the pigeon was not looking. 



It is a punishable offence to put down poisoned seeds or flesh on the 

 land, though poison for rats may be put down if placed where other 

 animals cannot suffer injury. If traps are used they must not be of a 

 nature likely to involve pain and suffering. 



Trespassers. 



Perhaps a few words with regard to trespassers may be of some 

 practical use. One often see3 notice boards exhibited to the effect that 

 " Trespassers will be prosecuted," but as a matter of fact you cannot 

 prosecute a man criminally merely because he trespasses on your land. 

 You can only do so if, while trespassing, he wilfully damages the land or 

 any cultivated roots or plants on it. Grass does not come within this 

 definition, so that it would be useless to prosecute merely on the ground 

 that while running or walking over the land damage had been done to it 

 by reason of the grass being trodden down. If only uncultivated roots 

 or plants, such as wild mushrooms, blackberries, primroses, or wild plants, 

 are trodden down there can be no criminal prosecution. On the other 

 hand, if you scatter mushroom spawn over your field the mushrooms are 

 legally looked upon as being cultivated plants, and a trespasser could be 

 criminally prosecuted for damaging them. 



A well-known Judge used to find a special delight in trespassing 

 wherever he saw a warning to trespassers. If the owner or keeper came 

 up to stop him the Judge would solemnly asseverata, " I claim no right, 

 I have done no damage, but in case I have inadvertently done damage I 

 hereby tender you the sum of one shilling in settlement." It may be as 

 well perhaps to point out here that one is not entitled to shoot at a 

 burglar when found on private premises, although one often comes across 

 a mistaken idea to the contrary. The punishment for burglary is 



D 



