- Email: [email protected]
Dogs and Their Licences
~rigillal DOGS
AND
BY H . HANNA,
Brticles.
THEIR
LICENCES.
BARRI STER · AT- LAW ,
D UB l.l r-; .
A SSUMING that the statement a t page 67I of the November number Qf the Journal is a correct summary so far a s the statute law of England on this subject is concerned, it is a pparent, from th e consideration of the Irish statute on the correspondin g subjectmatter, th at the ca se of the veterinary surgeon receiving dogs for treatment is, as rega rds licences, a caws omissus from the legislation for both countries. The Irish legislation is contained in the Dogs Regulation (Ireland) Act, I865. The differences in th e law of the two countries is very slight, and may be shortly summarised. I n Ireland you license a partic ular dog, and the description must be given in the licence, so as to identify the anillial ; in England, as Mr. FInney s hows, you license the indi vidual to keep on e dog, or two dogs, as the ca se may be. In England you cannot transfer the licence, but in Ireland you can do so in all cases of sale or gift of th e dog by obtaining a certificate of transfer from the Clerk of the Petty Sessions. In other respects the law of the two countries seems to be the same. Now wbat is the position of fhe veterinary surgeon? In Ireland , he cannot come under the transfer section, as he neither buys nor gets a gift of the dog , so that for all practical purposes he is in tlIe same position on this point in both countries. Section 7 of the Irish Act says that the occupier of any house or premises where any dog is I
A bllorma!£ties z"n the A 1'ter£a! System.
709
geon negligently allows a dog suffering from distemper, which is in his yard for treatment, to come into contact with another canine patient, transmitting to the la tter the infection, from which it dies, could the owner of the first dog be made liable for the negligence of the veterinary surgeon? If the veterinary surgeon is a servant or agent, he (the owner) would, on the most elementary principles of law, be liable. But it is obvious tha t the responsibility would be that of the veterinary surgeon alone, as he was an independent contracting party. But I would go further, and say that there is an error underlying the view that possession of the servant is possession of the master for the purposes of the dog- licensing legislation . The liability for licensing is by the statute attached not to any individual by reason of owning a dog in the sense of being the proprietor thereof, but solely by reason of his being in possession of the premises where it is kept. There is no mention of servant from the one end of the Act to the other, and if it is kept at the servant's premises for the master, in strict law the servant should be licensed. But, as a matter of practice, in both countries the owner licenses the dog in his own name, no matter where it is kept, and the possession of the licence has come to be regarded, in Ireland at least, where the dog is identified on it, as some evidence of ownership. These few remarks show that the position of the veterinary surgeon and the owners of canine hospitals should be, at some convenient time, brought under the notice of Parliament.
SOME ABNORMALITIES IN THE ARTERIAL SYSTEM OF THE HORSE. BY
J.
F . CRAIG, M.A., M.R.C.Y.S., PR O FESSOR OF ANATOMY IN THE ROYAl. VETERINARY COLl. EG E OF lREL",NO.
ABNORMAL appearances and positions of arteries are seldom found in print, although I am convinced that variations not infrequently occur. In some cases the variations are of more than technical interest, and it is in that belief I venture to describe a few I have met with in my dissections. Fore Limb-PreJl1lmeral Artery.-In one subject, the brachial artery in each limb did not give off the usual prehumeral artery, but at the lower border of the caput parvum a large vessel which was partly expended in the biceps. This branch sent upwards a considerable vessel to take the place of the prehumeral artery in front of the cora co humeralis muscle. Anterior Radial Artery is frequently the suhject of variations. In qllite half-a-dozen subjects it did not extend more than 2 or 3 inches below the elbow joint and terminated in the muscles in front of the joint. Termillals of Brachial A rtery .-A variation was seen recently in the off fore limb of an aged chestnut mare, an ordinary dissection subject. The brachial artery ended at the usual place on the inner condyle of the humerus, and gave off two terminal branches. The one corresponding to the usual anterior radial artery was rather larger than the posterior radial artery. The latter vessel d escended over the inner
AND
BY H . HANNA,
Brticles.
THEIR
LICENCES.
BARRI STER · AT- LAW ,
D UB l.l r-; .
A SSUMING that the statement a t page 67I of the November number Qf the Journal is a correct summary so far a s the statute law of England on this subject is concerned, it is a pparent, from th e consideration of the Irish statute on the correspondin g subjectmatter, th at the ca se of the veterinary surgeon receiving dogs for treatment is, as rega rds licences, a caws omissus from the legislation for both countries. The Irish legislation is contained in the Dogs Regulation (Ireland) Act, I865. The differences in th e law of the two countries is very slight, and may be shortly summarised. I n Ireland you license a partic ular dog, and the description must be given in the licence, so as to identify the anillial ; in England, as Mr. FInney s hows, you license the indi vidual to keep on e dog, or two dogs, as the ca se may be. In England you cannot transfer the licence, but in Ireland you can do so in all cases of sale or gift of th e dog by obtaining a certificate of transfer from the Clerk of the Petty Sessions. In other respects the law of the two countries seems to be the same. Now wbat is the position of fhe veterinary surgeon? In Ireland , he cannot come under the transfer section, as he neither buys nor gets a gift of the dog , so that for all practical purposes he is in tlIe same position on this point in both countries. Section 7 of the Irish Act says that the occupier of any house or premises where any dog is I
A bllorma!£ties z"n the A 1'ter£a! System.
709
geon negligently allows a dog suffering from distemper, which is in his yard for treatment, to come into contact with another canine patient, transmitting to the la tter the infection, from which it dies, could the owner of the first dog be made liable for the negligence of the veterinary surgeon? If the veterinary surgeon is a servant or agent, he (the owner) would, on the most elementary principles of law, be liable. But it is obvious tha t the responsibility would be that of the veterinary surgeon alone, as he was an independent contracting party. But I would go further, and say that there is an error underlying the view that possession of the servant is possession of the master for the purposes of the dog- licensing legislation . The liability for licensing is by the statute attached not to any individual by reason of owning a dog in the sense of being the proprietor thereof, but solely by reason of his being in possession of the premises where it is kept. There is no mention of servant from the one end of the Act to the other, and if it is kept at the servant's premises for the master, in strict law the servant should be licensed. But, as a matter of practice, in both countries the owner licenses the dog in his own name, no matter where it is kept, and the possession of the licence has come to be regarded, in Ireland at least, where the dog is identified on it, as some evidence of ownership. These few remarks show that the position of the veterinary surgeon and the owners of canine hospitals should be, at some convenient time, brought under the notice of Parliament.
SOME ABNORMALITIES IN THE ARTERIAL SYSTEM OF THE HORSE. BY
J.
F . CRAIG, M.A., M.R.C.Y.S., PR O FESSOR OF ANATOMY IN THE ROYAl. VETERINARY COLl. EG E OF lREL",NO.
ABNORMAL appearances and positions of arteries are seldom found in print, although I am convinced that variations not infrequently occur. In some cases the variations are of more than technical interest, and it is in that belief I venture to describe a few I have met with in my dissections. Fore Limb-PreJl1lmeral Artery.-In one subject, the brachial artery in each limb did not give off the usual prehumeral artery, but at the lower border of the caput parvum a large vessel which was partly expended in the biceps. This branch sent upwards a considerable vessel to take the place of the prehumeral artery in front of the cora co humeralis muscle. Anterior Radial Artery is frequently the suhject of variations. In qllite half-a-dozen subjects it did not extend more than 2 or 3 inches below the elbow joint and terminated in the muscles in front of the joint. Termillals of Brachial A rtery .-A variation was seen recently in the off fore limb of an aged chestnut mare, an ordinary dissection subject. The brachial artery ended at the usual place on the inner condyle of the humerus, and gave off two terminal branches. The one corresponding to the usual anterior radial artery was rather larger than the posterior radial artery. The latter vessel d escended over the inner