The sun., 1897-04-27
THE RELATION OF DOCS TO rHEL
Mr.. Justice Browp DeiiveFs ~ Opinion en the
Subject In the suprenae Court-

Subject In the supren,s Court.
WASHINGTON, April 26.-The relation Of dogl
| to tho law was discussed In the Supreme Court
to-day by Mr.. Justice Brown, in n case coming
from the Court Of Appeals Of New Orleans par
ish, La, to the undisguised amusement as we'll
as cdihcation Of court and audience. There was
an absence Of tho customary judicial tcchnicali.
ties that made tho delivery of the learned opin.
ion refreshing exception to the dry presenta-
tion OF legal principles and their application to
the facts involved which generally mark the
dcliveranccs OF tho court. George w. Sentoll
OF New Orleans wns the owner OF valu-
able registered Newfoundland bitch, which
lao kept for breeding purposes. While following
him on the streets OF the city she stopped on the
track OF the New Orleans and Cowallton Rail-
road Company, and not observing the approach
Of an electric car, and moreover, being in q
delicate state of health and not possessed of her
usual agility, she was caught by the car and In
stantly killed." Sentell sued the railroad COM
pany in District Court for $3.50 damages and
recovered that sum. On appeal the Court Of
Appeals reversed tho lower court, holding that
Sentell should have shown compliance with
the State laws and city ordinance regarding dogs.
by common law" said Justice Brown, =" as
well as by tho law of most. II not all, Of the
States. dogs sre SO far recognized as property
that an action Will He for their CO or IN
are not regarded as the subjects OF larceny. This
shows that property in dogs is OF an imperfect
being on the same plane with horses, cattle and
sheep, In which the right OF property is perfect
monkeys, parrots, singing birds, and similar AMI,
mails, kept for pleasure. curiosity. or caprice.
They have no intrinsic valuo-thatis, common to
or Individual. Unlike other domestic animais,
they are useful neither as beasts Of burden, for
4 As It is practically impossible by statute. to
distinguish between III different breeds, or be-
Tween the and the wOphess all lsgs
against the latter class and Is based upon the
will feel sufficient interest in him to comply
with any reasonable regulation designed to dis
the protection OF domestic animals are regarded
as having but u limited application to dogs and
eats; and; Irrespective Of statute ferocious
and having no right to life which man is bound
to respect"
dogs and decisions OF tho courts Hereunder
were quoted. going to stablish the principle
that for the keeping Of dog
lon then proceeds:
Although dogs are ordinarily harmless. they
stincts. which occasionally break forth in the do.
struction of sheep and other helpless animals.
simply vicious, noisy, and pestllent AS their
it is usually impossible, to identity the dog
who. moreover, is likely to be pecuniarily
irresponsible. In short, the damages are such
beyond the reach of judicial process and legis-
lation of drastic nature Is necessary to protect
persons and property from annoyance and de-
structior. Such legislation is clearly within tho
police power OF the State. While these regua-
tions Cn louisiana are more than ordinarily
stringent, and might be declared to be unconsti
orally, there Is nothing in them OF which the
owner Of dog has any legal right to complain.
The statute really puts premium upon valua-
BILE dogs by giving them recognized position
and by permitting the owner to put his own esti-
mate upon them. The Judgment of tn Court OF
Appeals is affirmed"