— —— .
Part VI. Sub-Sect.
3.
.
Dogs.
399 Sect.
Dangerous Dogs,
862. Adj court of summary jurisdiction may order that a dog which appears to be dangerous and not kept under proper control be kept by the owner under proper control or destroyed the penalty for failing to comply with such order is a fine not exceeding twenty shillings for every day during which such non-compliance conThe order for destroying the dog may be made without tinues {z). giving the owner the option of keeping it under proper control {a). In the metropoUtan area, upon complaint that a dog has bitten or attempted to bite any person, when it appears to a magistrate that such dog ought to be destroyed, the magistrate may direct the dog to be destroyed, and any police constable may destroy the same
accordingly
And
2.
Stat ute,
Dangerous dog not pJ^*^JJ.^^^^
control,
Destruction JJ^^g^^jf^^^^^
metropolis,
(?^).
an offence to suffer to be at large any unmuzzled Ferocious ^^^'S®ferocious dog, or to set on or urge any dog or other animal to attack, w^orry, or put in fear, any person, horse or other animal in any thoroughfare or pubhc place in the metropolis, or in any street in a town to which the Town Police Clauses Act, 1847, applies and a constable may take into custody without warrant any person who commits this offence in his view (c) it
is
do^
Sub-Sect.
4.
Mad
Dogs.
863. A local authority may, if a mad dog, or a dog suspected of being mad, is found within their jurisdiction, make and vary orders placing restrictions, during a prescribed period throughout the whole or part of their jurisdiction, on all dogs not being under the control {d) of any person. There is a penalty not exceeding twenty shillings for contravening the order, and dogs found at large in contravention of the order
may
be treated as stray dogs
(e)
an offence for the owner of any dog to suffer it to go at large knowing or having reasonable ground for believing it to be in a rabid state, or to have been bitten by any dog or other animal in a rabid state, or, after public notice given by any justice directing dogs to be confined on account of suspicion of canine madness, to suffer any dog to be at large, during the time specified, in any street of a town to which the Town Police Clauses Act, 1847 (/), applies. It is
(z) Dogs Act, 1871 (34 & 35 Yict. c. 56), s. 2. Where a dog is proved to have injured cattle or chased sheep, it may be dealt with under this section as a dangerous dog (Dogs Act, 1906 (6 Edw. 7, c. 32), s. 1 (4)). Presumably the word "owner" in this section has not the extended meaning given to it under Whether a dog is under control or s. 1 of the Dogs Act, 1906, p. 397, a7ife. not is a question of fact, not of law {Wren v. Pocock (1876), 40 J. P. 646 R. v. Huntingdon Justices (1879), 4 Q. B. D. 522; compare Jix parte Hay (1886), 3 T. L. E. 24). It is not necessary to prove the owner's knowledge that the dog is dangerous before making an order under this section [Parker v. Walsh (1885), T. L. R. 583). ] "Dangerous" includes dangerous to animals {Williams v. Richards, [1907] 2 K. B. 88). {a) Pickering v. Marsh (1874), 43 L. J. (m. c.) 143 R. v. Dymock (1901), 17 T. L. E. 593. (6) Metropolitan Streets Act, 1867 (30 & 31 Vict. c. 134), s. 18. (c) Metropolitan Police Act, 1839 (2 & 3 Yict. c. 47), s. 54; Town Police Clauses Act, 1847 (10 & 11 Vict. c. 89), s. 28. {d) It is a question of fact whether the dog is under control (see note {z), supra). (e) Dogs Act, 1871 (34 & 35 Vict. c. 56), s. 3. See p. 398, ante.
_
If) 10
&
11 Vict.
c.
89,
s.
28.
Orders by local authorities.
Offences p^f^^g Q^^^^^g Act, 1847.
