MUZZLING IN THE DOG-DAYS.
[TO THE EDITOR OF THE " SPECTATOR."f
SIR,—The renewal of the stringent order for the muzzling of dogs is likely to give much dissatisfaction, and not without reason ; for the frequent putting on and taking off these restraints already causes many people to leave their dogs at home when they would otherwise take them into the air. This has been of less importance during the cool weather, but in. the great heat of summer it will certainly be likely to develop nervous disease, and make the poor animals feverish and irritable. Many owners of dogs, too, muzzle their dogs too tightly, and thus prevent their drinking out of doors. On the whole, as a clever surgeon said to me lately, muzzles will do more to pro- mote than to check rabies.
There is some vagueness, too, in the expression, "under control," when applied to the leading of the dog. The animal being led by a chain or string does not at all secure that those who lead it shall be responsible for its condition and antecedents, for any rough may find or steal a docile dog, and easily induce it to let him lead it.
As it is really the security from disease that is required, and as that can be best obtained by imposing some responsibility upon the owner, may I suggest that every dog found without a collar bearing the name and full address of its owner, should be taken by the police, as " uncontrolled " dogs are supposed to be now And to make sure that the name, &c., on the collar are correct, the collar should have a small stamp or badge placed on it at the time of the last payment for the licence. This, though, of course, it would not prevent robbery, would make robbery more difficult, and would show that the dog had not been long in an unsettled or homeless condition.—I am, Sir, &c., S. E. Du M.
Previous page
