Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1876-04-14
A Question Of Law.

4AH- t-AN maui ift4'A A'-s+Ntra-H
\ man came into the Office Of Judge ".
the well-known lawyer. the other day, and
when the Judge had time to listen to i'm
he said
Judge, my name Is Sculder. called
TO see You about dog case that kinder be-
wilders me, and thought maybe yon might
throw some light IN her-might Just give
me the law points SOS I'D know whether it
was worth suing OF not
well, Judge. you see me and a man
named Potts went into partnership on dog
We bought him. lie was a setter, and ne
and Potts went shares on him SOS 10 take
him out-a-hunting 1t was never exactly
settled which halt Of him owned and which
half belonged to Potts, but somehow kinder
formed an idea in my own mind that the
hind end was Scudders and the front end
Potts Consequence was that when the dog
barked | always said, There goes Pott :
half exercising itself, and when the dog :
tail wagged | always considered that my end
was being agitated. And Of course when
one of my hind legs scratched one Of Potts
ears, or one of his shoulders, was perfectly
satisfied first, because that sorter thing
was good for the whole dog, and second, be-
the thing would get about even when Pott 5
head would reach around and bite a flea oil
of my hind legs OF snap at a ilv.
well, things went along smooth enough
for while, until one day that dog began 10
get into the habit Of running around after
his tail. lie was the ioolisnest dog about
that ever see Used to chase his tail
round and round until he'd get so giddy he
couldn't bark. And YOU know | was skeer-
ed lest it might hurt the dogs health, and
as Potts didn't seem to be willing to keep
his end from circulating in pursuit of my
end, made up my mind to chop the dog :
tail of. SOS to make him reform and be-
have So last Saturday caused the dog to
back up agin a log, and then | suddenly
dropped the axe on his tail, pretty close up,
and the next minute he was booming around
that yard, bowling like boat-load of wild
cats. Just then Potts came up, and he let
on to be mad because I'd cut of that tail.
One word brought on another, and pretty
soon Potts sicked that dog on me-my
own half, too, mind you-and the dog bit
me in the leg bit piece out. See that &;
look at that leg About half Il pound gone :.
eat up by that dog.
NOW, what want to see you about.
Judge, Is this; Can't recover damages for
assault and battery from Potts? What |
chopped off belonged to me, recolleet. 1
owned an undivided half of that setter pup,
from the tip of his tail clear up to his third
rib, and | had right to cut away as much
OF it as Id a mind to ; while Potts, being
sole owner of the dogs head, Is responsible
when he bites anybody"
81 don't know" replied the Judge, mus
ingly. There haven't been any decisions
on cases exactly like this. But what does
Mr.. Potts say upon the subject?''
"Why, Potts view Is that divided the
dog the wrong way. When he wants to
map out his half he draws line from the
middle of the nose. right along the spine,
and clear to the end of the tail That gives
me one hind leg and one fore leg. and makes
him joint proprietor in the tail. And he
says that if wanted to cut off my half OF
the tail might have done it. and he
wouldn't have cared but what made him
mad was that wasted his property without
consulting him. But that theory seems to