The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1897-01-21
HENRICO SPORTS IN COURT.
Mr.. H. NJ. Smith, Jr., Admits That a
Cock Is an Animal"
HIS CONSTRUCTION OF LAW IN CASE.
lie Claims That the statute Was Only In
tended TO Refer to Alexandria County
Captain \. IL. Guigon Appears for
Decision Reserved

The Hcnrico County Court Judge Ash
bv Wickham presiding. was engaged the
whole of yesterday morning in consider
ing the cock-hghting case which took
place at the Exposition Grounds Decom-
Der ]. 1856 when Dr. Jud. y. Wood,
the vieilant president OF the So
cioty for tho Prevention OF Cruelty
TO Animals, made raid upon the
fight and secured the names OF all con-
corncd I'm the affair.
I'm order that a test case might be made
Of the affair, Mr.. Thomas +. Vail, one OF
tho participants. appeared shortly after
the fight before Squire Lewis, and was
sent on TO the County Court, and 1t was
the case against him which came UP this
morning at ii o'clock.
Capt a. j.. GuigOn represented the ).
j. G. A., and Mr.. II. NJ. Smith. Jr., ap-
pcared for Mr.. Vail. The courtroom con-
tanned "a pretty liberal sprinkiing OF
sports. whose faces expressed the most
intense interest in the proceedings. Dr.
Jud y. Wood and Agent Emmett G. Tay-
lor were also interested spectators.
MI Smith opened the proceedings by n
motion TO Quash the warrant. on the
and dainty Of the Commonwealth" as
required by the Constitution were not
embodied I'm the warrant. The judge
overruled the motion. contending that the
form in question was not indispensable.
A COCK AN ANIMAL.
Tho question OF q demurrer TO the war
rant was then taken up, and Mr.. Smith
admitted that there was no question that
IL was scientifically correct TO designate
o. cock as an animal
"An authorities point that way" he
said. Anything capable of voluntary
motion, that hreathes. and has stomach
for the reception OF food is an animal !
contend, however. that the language and
provisions of the statute indicate that the
LEGISLATURE did not design 10 include a
game cock I'm the list of animals, cruelty
TO which is punishable by law
Mr. Smith then argued i'm favor or his
demurrer that the warrant was not
specific: it did not state the kind OF cruelty
uracuced toward the game cock in Ques-
tion. and no one could tell whether his
head was chopped off, or oil poured upon
his feathers ana set ON IRE
judge Wickham seemed to take some
what the same view of the case. lie said
that while 10 was not thought cruel TO
ohop off the head of 90 chicken. yet it
man took it by the legs and tore 81 apart
even though he did so with view OF
converting the bird into food would bring
himself within the provisions OF the law
against cruelty to animals. He thought
therefore. that the warrant should specify
the nature of the cruelty practiced.
Can't. Guieon took the view that the
Jury should pass upon the kind Of cruelty
uracticcd Dr. tine warrant began 10 de-
scribe its nature there would DE nowhere
10 draw the line.
judge Wickham decided that the war
rant as drawn was sufficient. Exception
was noted
SAME OLD GAME
Mr.. Smith ihon made an elaborate argyll
mcnt in favor of the position taken hy
him that the Legislature had not intend
"a fits statute on the subject Of cruelty
TO animals to apply TO cocks.
"Cock-fchung.' ho said "has never
been regarded ass violation OF law in
Virginia 10 was INDUCED in by MS in
our youth. by our fathers. and hv our
crandfathors. 10 was openly conducted.
and never suppressed unless IL became
public nuisance. Some time ago. however
the county OF Alexandra became so noe
toriouslv corrupt by reason of gambling.
cock-fehtinC. and other things that the
legislature Of Virginia passed special
law i'm reference 10 Alexandra county
"That law" continued Mr. Smith. can
he found ON fhe same page with The Sec
ton referring 10 cruelty 10 animals ana
contend that special law having he'n
raeeod concerning ono county shows that
A. was not intended 10 apply 10 others
He continued M great length ana
orotcd profusclv from legal authorities
I'm support Of his position.
,-r-yvcp ApEp INFORMATION.