The Appeal. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. ;) 1889-19??, 1889-07-13
A NOVEL TRIAL.
How a Four-Footed Criminal Was
Brought to Justice.

Some years ago a very novel trial
and execution took place in one of the
rural New England towns. If not
strictly legal. it was yet conducted &C
cording to certain forms of law. The
judge, lawyers and jury were boys, and
the criminal was dog.
TO term a dog a criminal may seem
to many readers contradiction in
terms, or at best whimsical use of the
word. For, of course, to be criminal
implies on the part of the accused a
knowledge that the act committed is
wrong, and prohibited under penalty.
The legal use of the term, to be sure,
Is not quite so far-reaching, since a
lack of knowledge or information as to
the penalty docs not excuse the wrong
doer. But, certainly, to be criminal
implies the possession and use of
rational powers in a normal condition.
But shall even attempt to show that
this particular dog was entitled to the
distinction implied in the ordinary use
Of the word. At the same time the
reader will do we'll to look to it that he
is not misled in forming his own
opinion.
He was large dog, part Newfound-
land, part Mastiff, or Saint Bernard,
or Irish Setter; there is some doubt on
this point. His name was "Brown."
The offense of which he was accused
and found guilty was sheep-killing, and
he was shown beyond doubt to be an
old offender, no less than twenty cases
of ovicide being laid at his door during
the trial, which was held on a Satur-
day afternoon at Il small district school,
house.
Sheep-killing is considered capital
offense on the part of dogs in rural
communities. It can scarcely be classed
us murder, for murder is the unpro-
voked slaughter of one creature by
another G. the same species or variety.
But [ believe that the boys who tried
and condemned Brown, charged him
with murder. However, this point does
Lot greatly signify, since it did not
help Browns case.
The trial brought out a great many
curious facts, for the two boys who
took the parts of prosecuting attorney
and0f counsel for Brown exerted them
selves to their utmost, and there were
aot less than twenty witnesses, pro
and con.
It was shown that Brown had ALWAYS
been q dog of good reputation in the
immediate neighborhood where his
master resided; that he was s general
!avorite with every one, that he had
performed Il number of meritorious &C
lions, and that he had never been
known to harm so much as & lamb on
his masters premises, or on those OF
his immediate neighbours.
The scene of his crime was the sheer
pasture of farmer, living three or
four miles distant. That me should
have spared all nearer fiocks and gone
to this distance from home, to CRAFTY
his hankering for illicit mutton, was
one OF the worst features ct the case
against him, on the score of moral de.
linquency. For it was argued that he
would never have slipped away by
night to such q distance had he not
fully aware that what he did was
wrong and subject to extreme penalty
Several similar cases were cited tt
show that when once dogs become
sheep-killers they wax abnormally fer
tile in tricks to avoid the suspicion O;
guilt.
1t was in evidence that, unlike many
other instances where two or three
dogs band together to kill sheep
Brown had never been known to take
another dog into his confidence, but
had stolen away from home alone; also,
that having once throttled a sheep in
this distant pasture and made meal,
he kept away from the place for a long
time afterwards, evidently alnder the
conviction that this was the safer pro.
cedure on his part.
Fromtthis piece of caution and good
judgment;it had resulted that several
innocenS dogs had lost their Dives. For
the iraae farmer in whose pasture
Brown dad chiefly committed his
depred ations, had repeatedly set traps
and laid poison in the carcasses of the
Slaughtered sheep. which had pur-
:posely been left exposed. He.counted
son the marauder's return, and hoped
thus to capture him. But Brown had
iresolutely kept away from all tempta-
1tion to indulge in a second meal, but
several innacent dogs, smelling the
quarry fror .afar, had been lrared to
their death.
In number. of cases their aorpew-
ingsnasters had been able to testify
that, on the might when the slaughter
took place, their dogs had been at
home chained aen.
In the course OF -sixtQr seven weeks,
when the excitement ana vigilance
reused by the former feray had sub
sided somewhat. Brown would pay the
flock another visit. He throttled but
one sheep at a visit, and even in this
particular evinced more prudence than
many such peccant CANNES exhibit.
"A great deal of the evidence against
Brown was largely cireumstaxtial, and
although altogether it made damag-
ing MAS of testimony, the boy who
acted as his counsel would probably
have cleared him, but for a single wit
1scss which the prosecuting attorney
vas able to produce.
This witness was = boy about four
teen years OF age, who had set q line
ot mink traps along a brook. In .