The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1874-05-23 00:00:00

Brown Institution, May Is.

" A Hoßpital Surgeon" has aim) sent the following
conimunicathm to The Times for publication :

The apprehension that exists in the public mind
with respect to hydrophobia might perhaps he somewhat
allayed by in knowledge if the tact that not only is the bite
of a rabid dog inflicted on man not necessarily followed by
the disease, but that the great majority of those who are
bitten escape all bad consequences.
Probably the number of the bitten who take the disease
does not exceed four or five per cent. Thus, Hunter states
that outs! 20 who were bitten by a rabid dog only one person
became hydrophobic and Sir Henry Halford's estimate is
even lower, for he says that of between 20 and 30 persons
bitten by a mad dog only one wag affected. These num-
bers are accepted by Eriehsen and other modern writers
on surgery as correct. The explanation of the immunity
from infection enjoyed by the great majority of those bitten
is to be found in the fact that the lute is usually inflicted
on the leg or some ether clothed part of the body, and tine
dog's tooth being consequently wiped in its passage through
the clothing, no inoculation of the wound with saliva can
ensue

A bite on a naked part, as the hands or face, is far more
dangerous, but yet not necessarily infectious. Thus, Elliot-
son mentions the case of two sisters both bitten on the face
by a rabid dog ; the second one bitten took the disease, the
tint escaped. And a Mr. White, of Brighton, who many
years ago, disbelieving the contagion of hydrophobia, in-
noculated himself Ph the saliva of a rabid dog, escaped
with impunity from the probable results of so rash au experi-
ment.
London, May 18.

In connection with this subject, Land and Water
writes :

We trust that the mad dog panic, which unhappily. :
Is but too well founded, will not hurry well-meaning pennons
into unnecessary acts of cruelty, such as are recom-
mended by some of our contemporaries, in the enforced
muzzling of dogs A more distressing instrument of torture
could hardly be devised than the ordinary strap muzzle,
as applied to the mouth of a dog, nor one more directly
calculated to produce the dreaded malady. Dogs not
only breathe but perspire through their mouths. In hot
weather, after even moderate exertion, the tongue will be
seen to hang down streaming with perspiration, and the
panting animal finds his only relief in the open mouth and
dripping tongue. To tie up the mouth is an act of abomin-
able cruelty—it were better far the poor beast were killed
outright than thus tortured. Bow, then, is this terrible
disease to be abated? Simply, we contend, by exercising,
towards dogs reasonable care and attention. A well-fed,
well-attended dog rarely, if ever, is known to go mad, unless
bitten by one of those mongrel masterless pariahs that still
Infest our streets in objectionable numbers— we counted
eighteen in a walk of a mile the other day. We would
am gent that to enforce the dog tax policemen should be
encouraged, by the receipt of a portion of the line, to ascer-
tain the responsible owner of every dug on their beats,
summons and surcharge him If the tax has not been paid,
flue him for allowing the creature to be at large irit ha&
At) excellent effect would be produced by rendering it im-
perative on the owner of every dog (excepting hounds) to
place on his neck a collar, with name and address engraved.
Tins would, moreover, tend to the safety of the policemen,
whose dangerous duty it is "to C 4 ,mprehend vagrom " cart
The Counnissioners of Inland Revenue are taking prompt
action. Large numbers of owners of dogs have been brought
up hcfore the magistrates at the instance of the revenue
officers, and been fined for having delayed taking out
licenses within a reasonable time after the tat of January.
In many instances, however, a compromise of 255. has been
accepted by the Commissioners • in others, where the de-
faulters appear before the magis.trates, the latter have ml-
posed penalties of 205., and upwards according to the nature
of the defence.