| Show THE LAW AGAIN MR JOHN areld of Mead meadow millard county who recently propounded some queries concerning the meaning of this law which were answered in these columns writes again as follows r thanks for your reply as to damages by animals in the news of oct 1886 1 venture to ask for light on one point not yet made clear and on which opinions conflict what is the intent of the law as to premises not under fence where we are living under a no fence lawa law can dai damages nages be recovered for trespass on firms farms town lots in ia towns that are not incorporated orchards and stack yards ards alike or must haust such lots etc be e enclosed with a lawful fence as required under theold law of 1880 page 48 please answer through the I 1 NEWS and oblige quite a number of its readers to aid in an attempt at reaching the meaning 0 of f the law we will reproduce those 79 portions 0 rations of it involved in in our correspondents questions see sec 3 if any neat cattle horses mules males sheep goats or hogs shall first break through a lawful fence or do damage within the enclosure or premises of any person int in any county or portion thereof where the inhabitants ants have shave declared or may hereafter declare in favor of fencing their f farms arms second break through a lawful fence within an incorporated city or town or any lawful fence enclosing 11 any city lot orchard or and do damage therein third do damage upon the premises of any person whether said premises are protected by a fence or not the person aggrieved thereby may recover damages ei either by an action against the owner ot the trespassing tres passing an animals imalA or by impounding them in tile the precinct pound SEC KEG 4 any county or precinct thereof may at a general or special elec election tiou called for that purpose by t the he county court py by a vote of a two thirds majority of its legal voters voting at such election declare in favor of fencing their farms and allowing their animals to run at large in such cases subdivisions sub divisions 3 8 of sc section tion 8 3 ot this act shall be inoperative during such period decided upon by such vote and damages may be recovered whether said farms alarms be protected by fence or not in subdivision sub division third of section 3 it is provided that damages may be recovered for harm done by trespass trespassing tres passing sing I 1 stock I 1 on the premises ot or any person whether said premises are protected by a fence or not undoubtedly the phrase premises of any person if would be held to include farms city lots in cities incorporated or unincorporated po rated orchards and stack yards unless the operation of subdivision sub division third or of section 3 is suspended by a vote of the people in favor of fencing it seems clear that no fence is needed around any kind of premises no matter whether located in or out of an incorporated corp orated city in order to entitle the owner to recover damages done by trespassing tres passing stock A question might be raised as to the correctness of this conclusion when applied to premises embraced in an incorporated city having an ordinance in conflict with the territorial statute the very last clause in the law is a provision intended to protect city governments in certain rights previously conferred upon them it reads in a nothing herein shall be construed to interfere with the rights of incorporated cities and towns to regulate impounding of animals and disposing of dt the same this provision gives to elty city governments power to reg the impounding and disposing of all animals iMMS an ordinance pursuant to the law would not be construed as in conflict therewith because different to the rule prescribed for the precinct but would be considered an exercise of that independent power specially delegated by the legislature and the ordinance would therefore undoubtedly govern elsewhere the voting system as previously stated would prevail even in large cities unless the people of the precinct or county had by a two thirds majority vote decided decad d in favor of fencing their property it follows then that damages may be recovered for injury done dode by trespassing tres passing animals upon any kind of premises fenced or unfenced no matter located in or out of an incorporated city unless the people of the county or precinct or the city council of a city have decided in favor or fencing in other words the law protects from trespassing tres passing stock the crops and otar other property of all citizens and they need not construct f fences enu e 8 to protect the same unless two thirds of the voters of a county or precinct vor voi aug 11 at an election neld for the purpose decide decide to protect themselves by fencing in order that they may allow their stock at large |
