Maryland independent. [volume] (Port Tobacco, Md.) 1874-current, 1881-01-07

important Decision By Judge WTckes IL Mc
Talbot County Corrf.

One of the most troublesome annoy
: ances and drawbacks to good neighbor
r hoods is the practice of some farmers il
permitting their stock to run at larg
upon the public roads the object being
generally, to enable them to crop til,
: grass growing upon the sides of the roads
1t this was the only cause of complain
IN such cases, forbearance would be Jus
tifiable; but the greater evil is found il
the fact that if a gate is left open, a whole
herd of cattle is found trespassing upon
neighbours field or garden, frequently
endangering the loss of an entire cror
when not discovered in time to drive
them out,
The owner of the land along which a
road is established is alone entitled to
the privilege of cropping the grass
thereon, and consequently any one per-
hitting his stock to run at large for this
purpose is a trespasscr 1t is high time
that this evil should be corrected and
we copy the following decision of one Of
our county courts TO aid in an effort TO
abate this serious nuisance,
Judge Wickes, in the Talbot County
Court, delivered the opinion of the court
in the case of Price VS.. Oliver, which
arose out of trespass of divers cattle
upon Prices enclosure. and the dee,s non
~ .s.G e ssr,aa .iins enacss stock law
l where that does not already prevail. We
give below the main points of the deci-
sion, as reported by the Talbot papers
The court held that the common law
in regard to trsspassing cattle, etc, is
in force now in Maryland, and that the
e rule of law is that a person is only bound
: to take care, that his cattle do not wan
der from his own land and trespass upon
the land of others; that a fence is for
the purpose of keeping your own stock
j at home, and not to keep others, stock
n off and if any one is damaged by anoth
er's stock trespassing on his land wheth
!. er fenced in or not, whether cleared
land, wood land or marsh land, he can
recover damages from the owner of the
, stock so trespassing.
' The court also held that under the
= statute law Of Maryland (arti lie g. title
" Estrays and Trespassing Catle") a
: person had three remedies for the tres
e pass on his enclosure by any cattle, bors-
0 es, sheep, hogs or any domestic animals
/ lie could take up the animals, and
, within reasonable time thereafter GO
before justice Of the peace and make
affidavit that he took up the animals as
: and cstray, and publish said affidavit
and Justices certificate, etc If he com
plies with the law, he can recover all
expenses incurred by the person taking
up the estray and keeping it, including
Tie cost of advertising. If any one a.
wallis himself of this remedy. he cannot
recover damages for the injury done.
,. Any person aggrieved by the tres
pass upon his enclosure of any cattle
may impound the same and have the
damage sustained by the trespass ap-
praised by two disinterested person !; and
unless the damage and reasonable COM
pensation for feeding the property i'm
pounded are paid, may, at the expira-
} tion Of ten days, SSH the same at public
auction, by giving the notice required
by the statute. This remedy seems to
apply where the owner of the cattle is
not known.
;. If any cattle, etc, trcspassing on
tie enclosures ofand person be distrain-
ed doing damage, the owner of which is
lno wn, il the owner do not tender com
pensation for the damage within FIVE DAYS
after such distress ana ,tico giving 10