Press enter after choosing selection

Damage Done By Trespassing Fowls

Damage Done By Trespassing Fowls image
Parent Issue
Day
4
Month
August
Year
1881
Copyright
Public Domain
OCR Text

The state of the law respecting the damage done by fowls trespassing in the garden is not generally understood. Many imagine they have the right to destroy the birds so trespassing, provided they do not remove the bodiea and utilise them. Such a proceeding would be unjust to the owner of the birds, as fowls, worth perhaps considerable sums, might be sacriflced for a trivial damage. No person would be justifled ia killing i liorse or a valuable dog that had atrayod into his garden, and the law is equally applicable to the protection of a fowl. Nevertheless, the injury oĆ­teii done by poultry must be remedied. We have irequently recommended the parties who have been aggrievod to sue the owners of the offending chickens in the county court. The following case, which we quote from the Derby Mercury, is conclusivo as to tho eflicacy of the proceeding. The cuse in as follows: Matthew Davis vs. Thoraas Page was a claim for L3, being for damage to a garden. The parties reside at Peartree, and the damage V! as alleged to have been caused by the defendant's fowls. The defendant was called to deny the allegations, but his Ilonour gave a verdict for 30s., including the 5s. paid into court. Had the plaintiff killed or even injured the fowls he might have found himself in the defendant's place, whereas, by adopting a legal reniedy instead of the high-handeil proceeding that would have commended itself to many, he obtains a remedy for the injury done to his arden, and doubtless secures

Article

Subjects
Old News
Ann Arbor Democrat