Prove that the defendant placed the piece of wood upon or across the railroad as described in the indictment, or was present aiding and assisting in doing so. The intent may be inferred from circumstances from which the jury may presume it. In general, the act's being done wilfully, and its being likely to obstruct or upset the railway train, would be sufficient prima facie evidence of an intent to do so. Where the engine or

carriage is in fact obstructed, or the safety of the persons conveyed therein is in fact endangered by the defendant's act, but there is no evidence of any of the intents mentioned in sect. 39, the defendant should be indicted for a misdemeanor under sect. 40.-R. vs. Bradford, Bell, 268.-A line of railway constructed under an Act of Parliament, but not yet opened for public traffic, and used only for the carriage of materials and workmen, is within the Statute.-Idem.-A drunken man got upon the railway and altered the signals and thereby caused a luggage train to pull up and proceed at a very slow pace: held, upon a case reserved, Martin, B. dissentiente, that this was a causing of an engine and carriage using a railway to be obstructed within the meaning of sect. 36 (40 of our Statute) of the Act in question.-Reg. vs. Hadfield, 11 Cox, 574.-A person improperly went upon a line of railway and purposely attempted to stop a train approaching by placing himself on the space between two lines of rails, and holding up his arms in the mode adopted by inspectors of the line when desirous of stopping a train: held that this amounted to the offence of unlawfully obstructing an engine or carriage using a railway under sect. 36 (40 of our Statute) of the Statute in question Reg. vs. Hardy, 11 Cox, 656.

INJURIES TO WORKS OF ART, PICTURES, STATUES, BUSTS, ETC., ETC.

Sect. 43.-Whosoever unlawfully and maliciously destroys or damages any book, manuscript, picture, print, statue, bust or vase, or any other article or thing kept for the purpose of art, science, or literature, or as an object of curiosity, in any museum, gallery, cabinet, library, or other depository, which museum, gallery, cabinet, library, or other depository is either at all times or from time to time open for the admission of the public or of any considerable number of persons to view the same, either by the permission of the proprietor thereof, or by the payment of money before entering the same, or any picture, statue, monument, or other memorial of the dead, painted glass, or other monument of work of art in any church, chapel, meeting-house or other place of divine worship, or in any building belonging to Her Majesty, or to any county, riding, city, town, village, parish or place, or to any university, or college, or hall of any university, or in any street, square, church-yard, burial ground, public garden or ground, or any statue or monument exposed to public view, or any ornament, railing or fence surrounding such statue or monument, or any fountain, lamp, post or other thing of metal, glass, wood or other material in any street, square or other public place, is guilty of a misdemeanor, and shall be liable to be imprisoned in any gaol or place of confinement for any term not exceeding one year, with or without hard labour, provided that nothing herein contained shall be deemed to affect the right of any person to recover, by action at law damages for the injury so committed.-24-25 Vict., ch. 97, s. 39, Imp.

See post, sect. 74, as to fine and sureties for the peace, in certain cases, if the Court thinks fit. The words or

TT

This is

other monument of work of art, are replaced by or other ornament or work of art, in the English Statute. undoubtedly an error of our printer.

INJURIES TO CATTLE, KILLING OR MAIMING CATTLE.

Sect. 44.-The word cattle wherever used in this Act shall have the meaning assigned to it in the Act respect ing larceny and other similar offences, passed in the present session.

Sect. 1 of the said larceny Act, 32-33 Vict., ch. 21, declares that the term "cattle" shall include any horse, mule, ass, swine or goat, as well as any neat cattle or animal of the bovine species, and whatever be the age or sex of the animal, and whether castrated or not, and by whatever technical or trivial name it may be known, and shall apply to one animal as well as to many.

Sect. 45.-Whosoever unlawfully and maliciously kills, maims, wounds, poisons or injures any cattle is guilty of felony, and shall be liable to be imprisoned in the Penitentiary for any term not exceeding fourteen years and not less than two years, or to be imprisoned in any other gaol or place of confinement for any term less than two years, with or without hard labour, and with or without solitary confinement.-24-25 Vict., ch. 97, s. 40, Imp.

Sect. 46.-Whosoever unlawfully and maliciously attempts to kill, maim, wound, poison or injure any cattle, or unlawfully and maliciously places poison in such a position as to be easily partaken of by any cattle, is guilty of a misdemeanor, and shall be liable to be punished by fine or imprisonment, or both, at the discretion of the Court.

Sect.

This last section is not in the English Act.-The words in italics in section 45 are not in the English Act. 46 seems to be declaratory of the common law.

As to

solitary confinement, under sect. 45, see sect. 94, of the Procedure Act of 1869. As to sureties for the peace, see sect. 74, post.

Indictment for killing a horse.—.

one horse of the goods and chattels of J. N. feloniously, unlawfully, and maliciously did kill, against the form...

The particular species of cattle killed, maimed, wounded, poisoned or injured, must be specified; an allegation that the prisoner maimed certain cattle is not sufficient. -R. vs. Chalkley, R. & R. 258.

No malice against the owner is necessary: post, sect. 66. Other acts of administering poison to cattle are admissible in evidence to show the intent with which the drug is administered.-R. vs. Mogg, 4 C. & P. 364. The word wound is contradistinguished from a permanent injury, such as maiming, and a wounding need not be of a permanent nature.-R. vs. Haywood, 2 East, P. C., p. 1076; R. & R. 16.

In R. vs. Jeans, 1 C. & K. 539, it was held that where part of the tongue of a horse was torn off, there was no offence against the Statute, because no instrument was used. But, under the present Statute, the same act was held to be a wounding within this section.-Reg. vs. Bullock, 11 Cox, 125. Upon a case reserved, in Rex. vs. Owens, 1 Mood. 205, it was held that pouring acid into the eye of a mare, and thereby blinding her, is a a maiming.-Setting fire to a building with a cow in it, and thereby burning the cow to death, is a killing within the statute.-R. vs. Haughton, 5 C. & P. 559.

KILLING OR MAIMING DOGS, BIRDS, ETC., ETC., ETC. Sect. 47.-Whosoever unlawfully and maliciously kills, maims, wounds, poisons or injures any dog, bird, beast or other animal not being cattle but being either the

subject of larceny at common law, or being ordinarily kept in a state of confinement, or kept for any domestic purpose, or purpose of lawful profit or advantage, or science, shall on conviction thereof before a Justice of the Peace, at the discretion of the Justice, either be committed to the common gaol or any other place of confinement, there to be imprisoned only or to be imprisoned and kept to hard labour, for any term not exceeding three months, or else shall forfeit and pay, over and above the amount of the injury done, such sum of money not exceeding one hundred dollars as to the Justice seems meet; and whosoever having been convicted of any such offence, afterwards commits any of the said offences in this section before mentioned, and is convicted thereof upon indictment, is guilty of a misdemeanor, and shall be liable to be punished by fine or imprisonment, or both, in the discretion of the Court; provided always that the prosecutor may, if he sees fit, proceed before a Justice of the Peace as for a first offence.—24-25 Vict., ch. 97, s. 41, Imp.

The words in italics are not in the English Act. They are altogether superfluous. As to summary convictions, see post, sects. 71 and 75, and sect. 90, Procedure Act of 1869, as to fine and imprisonment,when not specially determined As to indictment for the misdemeanor after a previous conviction, see sect. 26, Procedure Act of 1869, and ante, remarks under section 26 of this Act.

Greaves says: "This clause is new, and is a great 'improvement of the law, as it will protect domestic animals from malicious injuries. It includes any beast or animal not being cattle, which is the subject of larceny at common law. It also includes birds which are the subject of larceny at common law such are all kinds of poultry, and, under certain circumstances, swans and