The people's journal. (Pickens, S.C.) 1891-1903, 1899-06-29
A WALLER DOG IS VALUABLE.
TAXED AS PERSONAL PROPERTY
Ehe Supreme Court Holds that
Ownors OF Dogs Are Entitled 10
Have Them Protected from rhicycs

The Supreme Court Holds tha
Owners OF Dogs Are Entitled u
Have Them Protected from Thieves
The State supreme court in the case
OF The State vs. George Langford ha.
In the last few days rendered deci
sion that Is Of most general interest
and is certainly unique of character
The position OF the lower court is re
versed In the case, and the court de-
termlnes that dog Is u subject OF lar.
ceny. Justice Ira B. Jones' readable
oplDion On the subject is as follows:
IN thls case the State appeals from
an order quashing an indictment con
larry OF dog house within 200 yards OF
and appurtenant to the dwelling OF
Mary Nichols, with intent to sleai,
etc, the goods and chattels Of Mary
Nichols in the said dog house, the
count charging larceny Of u dog Of the
value OF $40, OF the proper goods and
chattels Of Mary Nichols then and
there being found In the said dog
house. In sustaining the demurrer to
the Indictment the circuit court held,
hrst, that larceny cannot be commit
OF a dog; second, that the intent ~
steal goods and chattels, charged in
the first count, necessarily implies the
stealing OF dog, because from a dog
IL therefore not charged ; third, that
1t Is not compound larceny to stoal
from dog house, as alleged in the
| second count.
The first and principal question pre-.
sented is whether u dog is the subject
| OF larceny.
Dy the old common law larceny
| could not be committed OF dog. The
reasons assigned for this were the
baseness Of the nature of such crea-
ture that 1t was kept for mere whim
and pleasure; that, being unit for
food, 1T was OF no Intrinsic value; that
the penalty for the felony of larceny
was too severe to apply for the steal
ing OF 50 contemptible creature. BY
the statute of 10, George ILL.,, chapter
lS, George III was fond of stag hunt
lng) the taklr md carrying away OF
q dog was mp punishable, but not as
larceny. ! Ler the reasoning salts
factory at hat day it was larceny to
steal at ne hawk but not larceny to
steal oame dog, although it was lar
ceny to steal the hide OF dead dog
Yet by the common law dogs were held
to be such property rs would sustain
an action of power for their recovery.
Civil remedies were permitted for in
jury to or loss OF dogs, and they would
go to the executors and administrators
rs property. The reason for the out
lawry of dogs in favor of thieves can
hardly be regarded az persuasive at
this day and here, and such crude ap
pllcation OF the principles of the com
mon law must yield to common sense.
The fitness Of an animal for food is
not the fullest of its value to mankind {;
It's capacity for useful service in other
ways Is often the real test Of value
Nor is the fact that an animal Is kept
Tor the whim and pleasure OF its owper
any sort OF reason for excluding it from
the law OF larceny rs q thing of no
value, for amusement has It's valuable
uses for men. Neither is 1t just to Say
Of the dog that its nature is SO base as
to render 1t unworthy OF protection rs
absolute property, for as Baron Cuvier
says the dog Is the " completest, the
most singular and the most useful con
quest ever made by man."
When we are told that the Greeks
and Romans employed dogs in war,
COrinth was saved by war dogs, which
attacked and checked the enemy until
the sleeping GARRISON were aroused, we
better understand Shakespeare's An
tony when he said, Cry havoc and
let slip the dogs of war" We should
not let contempt for sheep.killing dogs
and our dread Of hydrophobia do in.
justice to the noble Newfoundland that
b""ves the water and rescues the
drowning child; to the Esquimaux
dog, the burden bearer of the Arctic
regions; to the sheep dog that guards
the shepherds tlocks and makes sheep
raising possible In some countries to
the ST. Bernard dog trained to rescue
travellers lost or buried 10 the SHOWS Of
the Alps; to the swift and docile
grey hound; to tho package carrying
spaniel; to the sagacious settlers and
tables are supplied with the game of
the season; to the fleet fox hound,
whose music when opening on the
fleeing fox Is sweet to many ears to
the faithful watch dog, whose honest
bark, as Byron says, bays deep.
mouthed welcome as we draw near
home )" to the rat-exterminating
terrier to the wakeful fee, which the
burgla breads moro than he does the
sleeping master; to oven the pug,
whose ugliness inspires the alteration
OF the mistress to the brag 'possum
dog and coon dog, for which the owner
Will nght II imposed upon and lastly
to the pet dog and playmate OF the
American boy, to say nothing of the
"yaller dog" that deGes legislatures.
or all animals the dog Is most do
mestic. It's intelligence, docllity and
devotion make 1t the servant, the COM
panion and the faithful frieud OF man.
The raising and training of dogs is
no" pursued by many as business !;
largo sums of money arc invested IN
them, and they are bought and sold as
other property. In this State, by
statute, dogs are and have long been
taxed as personal property, according
to. value, and for revenue. AS stated
In Sally vs. II. r., 81 S. c., 484, What
the law taxes as personal property it
will protect as SUCH" This legisla-
tion Ia potent in two ways first, II tho
common law rule, Notwithstanding the
fal llacy OF the reasoning upon which it
Is based as applied to present condi-
! tions, should be held Of force In this
State in the absence of notifications
| by statute, then 10 the statute taxing
dogs as personal property ad valorem
| I'm n1i lon ~ ha