“Because I scarcely know what to say. The point seems open to argument. I don’t remember any case where the depredations of mice have occupied the attention of a court of law, although there have been several decisions on the subject of rats.”
“Well, and what were they?” exclaimed my wife, impatiently. “That a man can keep the nasty things in his house, and let them damage the property of his guests, and not pay for them?”
“In one case where rats gnawed a hole in the bottom of a boat, and the water, coming in at the leak, damaged goods on board, the owner of the vessel was held liable for the performance of those rodents;[272] and in another case, carriers were held responsible for their depredations on board a ship, although there were cats and mangooses on board, and the owners had availed themselves of the valuable services of the venerable sire of the pretty rat-catcher’s daughter of Paddington Green.”[273]
“But you stupid man, we are not on board ship,” said my amiable and accomplished spouse.
“And,” I replied, “that is exactly where the difficulty arises; for where a man had a water-tank on the roof of his house, and the rats gnawed through a leaden pipe so that water trickled down and injured the goods of another fellow on the ground floor, the court held that the owner of the establishment, who occupied the upper flat, was not responsible—and Chief Baron Kelly remarked that it was absurd to suppose that a duty lay on the landlord to exclude the possibility of the entrance of rats from without.”[274]
“That seems a very different view from that taken by the judges in the other cases,” remarked Mrs. L.
“Yes; but the Chief Baron said that the case of a ship was wholly different—that it might be possible to insure freedom from rats in a ship, but that it was impossible to say that this could be done with respect to warehouses generally,[275] and another judge remarked that a landlord could not be considered negligent if he omitted taking means to get rid of these pests till there was reason to suppose they were in the building.”[276]
“Never mind what others considered and thought and said—what do you think?”
“I think that perhaps the rule would apply that if a man permits an animal to remain in his possession he becomes liable for the mischief it commits.”[277]
“Do you know what I think?” queried my wife.