Essex County herald. [volume] (Guildhall, Vt.) 1873-1964, 1913-08-08

queries are net part of any foolish
question series, but are examples of
the inquiries upon which courts of
law have engaged themselves in
their efforts to prevent unnecessary
suffering to animals. AS the judge
leaves the der ision Of these questions
to the jury, one average citizen is as
competent to answer them as anoth-
er. 1t all depends upon what hap
pened to the worm or the oyster
whether it hurt the victim, why it
was done, the viewpoint of the one
making the decision, and few SIM
pier rules of law.
A recent case of similar nature has
attracted public attention and drawn
forth an interesting opinion from
the Judge. The case arose in New
York and involved the question as
to whether cruelty to turtles is cruel
ty to animals and further, whether
you can be cruel to a turtle. Sixty
five green turtles were shipped
from Cuba on steamship with their
flippers perforated and tied together
by means of ropes passing through
the holes. The turtles were placed
on their backs and so remained until
the ship reached New York City. The
captain of the ship was prosecuted
under the penal law of New
York, the charge being that he had
caused these turtles unnecessary and
unjustifiable pain and suffering
while in transit.
The first objection made was that
a turtle is not an animal and so the
act was not covered by the statute.
The statute of New York defines an
animal as not including the human
race, but every other living creature.
Notwithstanding that a turtle is a
species of reptile, the court held
that turtle is included in the def
milton.
1t was next considered as to
whether unjustifable pain was in
fiicted. On this point the court COM
mented as follows:
Hogs have the nose perforated
aud a ring placed in it; ears of calves
are similarly treated; chickens are
crowded into freight cars; Goldfish is
taken out of the waters and thrown
into barrels of ice and sold on the
market as live cod; cells have been
known to squirm in the frying pan;
and snails, Holsters and crabs are
thrown il to boiling water. Irrespct-
i've of the devious means that might
be adopted to destroy life before
these cruelties are perpetrated upon
them, still no one has raised a voice
in protest.
The Emperor Augustus nearly ex-
terminated peacocks to regale him
self in Rome with their brains. To-
day the world would hold their death
unjustifiable. Then again juries and
magistrates of different localities,
race, or education, with varying
ideas of taste and cuisine, may hold
widely divergent ideas as to whether
the improved flavor of Holsters boil
ed alive ma kes such torture 'justifi.
able. "
The court left the matter to the
jury. How would you decide
the case?
The protection afforded dumb an
mails against cruelty rests upon gpar-
ticular statutes as enacted by the
legislatures of the various states, and
not upon any general principle of
English law, unless the act be done
in public and so amount to a NUS
ance. Thus, just what may be pun
ished as cruelty to animals in par
ticular state depends upon the word
ing of the laws of that state. Grim
inal statutes against cruelty to ami
mails are virtually universal. These
laws are generally of similar nature
and usually apply to all animals other
than humans, as does the New York
statute. The law does not, of course
prohibit all acts that cause animals
pain or suffering, but only such as
are unjustifable and not necessary
to the accomplishment Of some law
full purpose. The butcher may kill
the steer he has bought, and is not
legally guilty of cruelty since his act
is in the accomplishment of lawful
purpose. But if he slaughters the
steer in needlessly cruel manner he
hncopoas o.I,iltv of cr,,altw 70 on;