§ MR. M'LAREN (Cheshire, Crewe)asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether his attention has been called to the unsatisfactory state of the law regarding the liability of farmers who shoot stray and possibly mad dogs found wandering among their cattle, as shown by the case of "Legh v. Tickle," tried in the Northwich County Court, on November 17th 1886, in which the defendant was fined £15 for shooting a dog he believed to be mad which was wandering on his farm; whether he is aware that great damage is frequently done to farmers by dogs which are not mad biting their cattle; damage for which the farmer usually can get no redress, either because he cannot trace the owner, or because the owner is without means to compensate him; and, whether he will introduce a short Bill to give farmers reasonable protection from such damage, and power to shoot dogs which are found straying in their fields, and which they have reason to believe will injure their cattle?
§ THE SECRETARY OF STATE (Mr. MATTHEWS) (Birmingham, E.), in reply, said, he had read in the newspapers the case to which the hon. Member referred. The learned County Court Judge decided that the conduct of the farmer was, under the circumstances, unjustifiable, the behaviour of the dog forming no reason for its destruction. He was not aware that great damage was often done to farmers by dogs which wore not mad 881 biting cattle. He was informed that dogs injuring property might be properly destroyed by the owner of the property. He could not undertake to introduce a Bill giving farmers power to shoot stray dogs.