SHEEP WORRYING.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 1648, 30 September 1903, Page 65

SHEEP WORRYING.

Although the law is clearly enough understood as -applying to the legality of a person shooting or destroying a dog at large on his own property, or .attacking any person, horse* sheep, or cattle without being answerable for damages to the owner of such dog, yet it has not been quite clear that any person may follow the offending dog on to another man’s properly. Quite recently, at the Rangiora Court Mr. Bishop, S.M., after taking time to consider his decision, lias, however, affirmed that the meaning of the term “at large” as applied to dogs in sections 14, 15, 17, and 18 of the Dog Registration. Act, 1880, is that dogs must be under the physical and actual personal control of their owner, otherwise upon the logical interpretation of the word rt at large,” the dog must be considered as liable tc- be destroyed. In the case in point a resident of Loburn, in North Canterbury, claimed <b6 for loss of a dog shot by the defendant, who l saw it in another person’s sheep paddock. The owner of the field, with whom plaintiff resided, had given defendant no. permission to* go on his land to destroy any dog he might find among his sheep. The plaintiff said his dog was not at -liberty many minutes before he was shot by defendant. The latter proved that sheep had been bitten, and, seeing the dog at large among them he destroyed it., The

magistrate held that although defendant actually trespassed on the. land of an--other person, he was justified in his conduct. The section of the Act affecting this reads : “ Any person who shall see a dog, being" at large, biting or attacking any person or any horse, sheep, or cattle, or who shall himself be bitten or atta.c3i.ed by such dog, may destroy the same without being answerable for damage occasioned thereby.”