Dog. Draught.--The (English) Protection of Animals Act, 1911, s. 9, and the (English) Protection of Animals (Scotland) Act, 1912, s. 8, prohibit, under a penalty, the use of any dog in England or Scotland for the purpose of draught.
Licenses.--Dog licenses are regulated by the (English) Dog Licenses Act, 1867 (30 Vict. c. 5), as amended by 32 & 33 Vict. c. 14, s. 38, 41 Vict. C. 15, ss. 17-23, and 42 & 43 Vict. c. 21, s. 26. They commence on the day of grant, and terminate on the 31st of December following; but procuring a license on the day of a conviction will not avoid the penalty up to 5l. under s. 8 of the Act of 1867, Campbell v. Strangways, (1877) 3 CPD 105. The present duty is 7s. 6d., to which it was raised from 5s. by the (English) Customs and Inland Revenue Act, 1878 (41 & 42 Vict. c. 15), and this s. is amended by s. 5 of the (English) Dogs Act, 1906. See Johnson v. Wilson, (1909) 2 KB 497. No duty is payable for dogs under six months old (Act of 1867, s. 10), or hound whelps under twelve, never used or entered with any pack of hounds, the proof of age lying on the owner by s. 19 of the latter Act, which also, by s. 21, exempts the dogs of the blind used solely by them for their guidance, and by s. 22 shepherds' dogs, on a special procedure being followed by farmers or shepherds. The (English) Protection of Animals (Cruelty to Dogs) Act, 1933 (23 & 24 Geo. 5, c. 17), gives power to any Court before which a person is committed under the Protection of Animals Act, 1911, of an offence of cruelty to a dog, to order him to be disqualified for keeping a dog and for holding or obtaining a dog license for such period as the Court thinks fit.
Injury to Cattle.--The (English) Dogs Act, 1906 (6 Edw. 7, c. 32), repealing and re-enacting the (English) Dogs Act, 1865, which had set aside the rule of the common law, enacts that--
The owner of a dog shall be liable in damages for injury done to any cattle [including, by s. 7, horses, mules, asses, goats and swine] [or poultry, by the (English) Amendment Act,1928, s. 1] by that dog; and it shall not be necessary for the person seeking such damages to show a previous mischievous propensity in the dog, or the owner knowledge of such previous propensity, or to show that the injury was attributable to neglect on the part of the owner. See Arneil v. Paterson, (1931) AC 560 (two dogs owned by different owners, each liable for whole damages); Knott v. L.C.C., (1934) 1 KB 126 (responsibility of person in control).
Injury to Human Beings.--To recover damages, the injured party must show that the dog to the knowledge of the owner or controller was ferocious towards mankind: e.g., that it had bitten or attempted to bite mankind, Osborne v. Chocqueel, (1896) 2 QB 109; but the knowledge of a servant is not enough, Applebee v. Percy, (1874) LR 9 CP 325. The owner may be liable though the bite was caused by the intervention of a third person, Baker v. Snell, (1908) 2 KB 825.
Stray Dogs.--The (English) Dogs Act, 1906, em-powers police officers to seize any stray dog found in a highway or place of public resort, with the result that it may be sold or destroyed if not claimed after notice to the owner or person whose name and address is on its collar; and by s. 4 any person taking possession of a stray dog must either return it to its owner or give notice to the police.
As to importation and quarantine of dogs, see (English) the Dogs Act, 1906, s. 2, and ANIMAL (DISEASES).
Dangerous Dogs.--The destruction of a dangerous dog by order of a Court of Summary Jurisdiction without giving the owner the option of keeping it under control, Pickering v. Marsh, (1874) 43 LJ MC 143; Lockett v. Withey, (1909) 99 LT 838, is provided for by s. 2 of the (English) Dogs Act, 1871. 'Dangerous,' as used here, is not confined to meaning dangerous to mankind, Williams v. Richards, (1907) 2 KB 88.
Board of Agriculture Orders.--S. 2 of the (English) Act of 1906 empowers the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries to make orders prescribing and regulat-ing the muzzling and the wearing of collars by dogs, and 'with a view to the prevention of worrying of cattle for preventing dogs or any class of dogs from straying during all or any of the hours between sunset and sunrise,' on pain of being seized and treated as 'stray.' Dogs belonging to a pack of hounds are exempted, Burton v. Atkinson, (1908) 98 LT 748; Rasdall v. Coleman, (1909) 100 LT 934.
The Commissioner of Police in the Metropolis may require dogs while in the streets and not led to be muzzled. [(English) Metropolitan Police Act, 1839 (c. 47)]
Although dogs are not the subject of larceny at common law, the offence is covered by the (English) Larceny Act, 1861, s. 18, and the Larceny Act, 1916, s. 5. See DOG STEALING; ANIMALS.
See Manson on Dogs; Chit. Stat., tit. Dogs.
View Judgments Citing this Phrase View Acts Citing this Phrase