The Sun.
London, England, 1864-07-27 00:00:00

THAMES.

CRUELTY TO AN ANIMAL.—EXTRAORDINARY CASE.—
Mr Mask Ayers, the landlord of the " Crown Tavern," a
public house situate at a place called the Orchard House,
Poplar, appeared before Mr Paget, to answer a summons
taken out by Georgo Young, a constable in the service of
the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals,
who charged the defendant with cruelly ill•treating and
tot turing a dog.
Mr Charles Young, solicitor, conducted the prosecution
for the Royal Society; Mr Gomm appeared for the
clef

It appeared from the evidence of Alfred Thomas, a
mechanic, that on Tuesday, the 21st of June last, he went
into the parlour of the Crown to obtain some refreshment.
He had a dog with him, which he allowed to run loose
about the house. He was in the parlour 20 or 25
minute when he heard the cries of his dog in the yard.
He hastened into the yard as quickly as possible, and saw
the defendant, who was armed with a thick stick, beating
the dog as hard as ho was able. He asked the defendant
what he meant by such conduct, and he replied that the
dog had been killing his chickens. Tlie dog was killed by
the defendant.

In cross-examination by Mr Gomm the witness said that
when he first saw the dog in the defendant's yard it was
behind a tub. The defendant said the dog was not yet
dead, and beat it again with the stick, and flung it on the
ground.
John Patrick, a moulder, stated that he was sitting at

the window of the Crown tavezn, and heard the cries of the
dog. Ho saw the defendant beating it unmercifully with

:h; stick in his hand.

Mr Gomm, in defence, urged there was no cruelty in the,
case, and that the defendant seeing the dog among the
fowls in the yard whore his children were playing became
alarmed, and went into the yard, where he found two of his
chickens killed and the children alarmed. Vie defendant
took up a stick and struck the dog a few blows and killed it.
Three witnesses were called for the defenco, who said no
unncessary cruelty or torture was used, and that the defen-
dant struck the dog three blows and killed it. One of the
witnesses caused some amusement by saying that the dog
ate two of the defendant's fowls, and only left three feathers.

Mr Paget thought it strange that a dog should eat fea-
thers, and the defendant said that the complainant's dog
killed two of his chickens and atc one and a half. The other
half was left.
Evidence was then given that Thomas took two dogs

of the lurcher species into the Crown, and that he kept one
securely fastened with him in the parlour. The other,
which was represented to be 3 months and 11. days old, was
allowed to range about the premises,
Mr Paget said this was a very proper prosecution on the
part of the' Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to
Animals. Ho thought the defendant was guilty of a very
cruel and a very brutal act, but he believed it was done
hastily and without premeditation. The defence set up was
not creditable either to the defendant or his witnesses. It
was a ridiculous defence. It was very improbable that the
dog that was beaten to death ate the fowls. As to any alarm
for the children it was a trumped up story. He fined the
defendant 20s for cruelty to a dog, to pay 20s compensation
for the loss of the animal, and to pay 26a costs,
The defendant immediately paid the money.

THE CASE OF MRS. YELYERTON.—The further
consideration of this case, which will be the judgment, has
been postponed to Thursday (to-morrow).
A FIGHT BETWEEN AN ELEPHANT AND A BULL.
When the elephant was brought to the Place des Taureanx
a fiery young bull was turned out. The bull advanced
against his terrible adversary without evincing the
slightest fear. Ha attempted to flank him in order to
wound him; but the elephant, exhibiting an equal agility
in his motion, did not suffer him to approach. Finally
the bull attacked him in front ; bit everywhere con-
fronted by the formidable tusks, which interposed an
impregnable barrier, ho did not succeed in wounding
him. At last, in one of the assaults, the bull succeeded
in thrusting his head beneath the tusks; but, before be
could penetrate the tough hide of the elephant, he fell
to the earth. The spectators only saw the elephant bend
his head slightly, and rest the extremities of his tusks
which had been plugged, upon the back of the bull. From
that moment the bull was hors de combat, and when they
afterwards killed him it was found „that three r;bs
were completely crushed by the almost imperceptible
movement the elephant had made in holding him with his
tusks.—..l/aci7 id ,mr.per.

WASTE OF WAR.—In the last twelvemonth the
Federal army have lost by death, capture, or otherwise,
57,676 horses and 17,190 mules—more than one horse out of
every four, and nearly one mule in every seven. 'lhia un-
precedented destruction of horses and mules will have to be
arrested, or it will ho impossible to remount our cavalry
and provide for our artillery and waggon trains.—Anierican

paper.
We understand that Sir Georg© Grey has ep.
pointed Mr James Henry Patteson, of the Northern Circuit,
teraury to the Compieisiou 9/1 Nita' Punishment,