Nevada County picayune., 1889-09-04
DISNORNING OF CATTLE.
An English Decision g, hich D 'olares u
 Cruel and ind 'tensibic.

An English Decision Nhich D'olares b
 Cruel and ind 'fensibic.
 We report this morning the impor- tant judgment delivered by Lord Chlef- Justice Coleridge and Mr. Justice Haw- kins on the legality of dishorning cattle. The case came before them by way of appeal from decision Of the Norfolk magistrates at the Bloheld Petty Sessions. Mr. Wiley, Norfolk farmer. had been summoned at the in- stance of the Society for the Proven tion of Cruelty to Animals for having unlawfully and cruelty tortured thirty two bulocks by dishorning them.
 The facts were in no dispute. MT. Wiley admitted that he had done what was alleged, and gave every facility to the officers of the society for ascer- taining how it had been done. and in what state the animals operated upon had been left That the operation, as performed on Mr. Wiley's farm, had been attended with intense and pro- longed suffering to the animals was clearly proved, and does not seem to have been denied. The defense set up was that it was neces- sary for variety of reasons IL added to the value of the animals; 1t enabled them to be packed more closely than they could have been il they had retained their horns, and it prevented them from inlicting injury on one another, whether closely packed or not. The magistrates in the event dismissed the case, but without costs, since they considered that the society had done great good by instituting it, and at the request of the society they stated case for the opinion of the Queens Bench Judges, giving the req sons of their decision and asking whether the decision was to stand.
 The question has been met with a decided negative by the judges to whom it had been referred. The op- eration of dishorning, as it is ordinarily practiced, and as it was practlced on Mr. Wileys farm, has been pronounced cruel and indefensible. "Detestably brutal,n is Lord Coleridge's language in describing it. Mr. Justice Hawkins terms it revolting operation, so tor turing that he shudders to think that men can be found to perform it. As to it's absolute illegality both judges are in agreement. That it adds some what to the selling value of the ami ! Il I hs ol a n- l fense for it, rather since the re- suits aimed at can be attained equally well without it. The cruelty of the operation. amounting to downright torture, was proved by profession- al evidence, and Was substantial- 1 ly admitted by the defense. The main benefits of it could be obtained by more simple and painless process except, indeed, as fur as it enabled the seller to put q fraud on the incau tious purchaser as to the animal breed or age. As to its alleged neces sity, the court was clear that prac ticc which had for many years beer unknown or wholly discontinued 1T England and Wales. and in most coun' ties of Scotland, and had only recent ly been introduced from Ireland could not be thought necessary.
 In any case, there aust be some pro portion between the object a,mcd a and the means. In the case before thu court no such proportion could bt found The animals had been hide ously tortured' in order to put feV pounds more into the owners pockets and this Lord Coleridge said, is ah in stance of such utter disproportion be tween the thing done and the result a to stamp it as barbar0us and unlawful The end sought Mr. Justice iiawkiH added, may not be attained at the sac rifice at which it must be had. For { man to buy horned cattle and to en hance their value by mutilating then at the expense of eXcruciating tortur' to the animals must be set down a needless cruelty. Some former cases which have been decided in an oppo site sense, were put forward by thu defense. but were set aside by the Court with full expression of the re spect due to the authorities before whom they had been heard -Londol