Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

54 Conn. 1

State v. Bosworth

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided January 22, 1886

Supreme Court of Connecticut · decided 1886-01-22

Complaint by a prosecuting officer of tbe Connecticut Humane Society for cruelty to animals, upon which the defendant was bound over by a justice of the peace to the Superior Court in Tolland County. In that court the defendant demurred to the complaint; the demurrer was overruled, and the case tried to the jury before Andrews, J. Verdict guilty and appeal by the defendant. The ease is fully stated in the opinion.

Cited in Black's (1910)’s definition of “Cruelty” · Black's (1910)’s definition of “Cruelty to animals”

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1886-01-22

How this case has been cited

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently December 2022

4 state decisions

10188618901900191019201930194019501960197019801990200020102020decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Carpenter, J.

¶1The only question presented by this record which we can notice is that which arises on the demurrer. The only ground of demurrer is that several offenses are alleged in each count.

¶2The first count charges the defendant with cruelly overworking certain oxen from the first to the fourteenth day of January, 1885. The second count charges him with neglecting to provide them during the same period with proper food, drink and protection. The third charges that during the same period he deprived them of proper sustenance.

¶3Properly construed there is but one offense in each count. Perhaps it may be said that there is but one offense charged in all the counts. The court below must have so regarded it, as there was but one fine imposed. The gist of the offense is cruelty to'animals. That may consist of overworking, under-feeding, or depriving of proper protection, or all these elements may combine and constitute the offense.

¶4But aside from this, all offenses involving continuous action, and which may be continued from day to day, may be so alleged. This is obviously an offense of that character, and the demurrer was properly overruled.

¶5In this opinion the other judges concurred.

/54/conn/1 · .json · Public domain