The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1872-01-24
MIR. Bergh and His hissiou-whas He

should DOs
Have we really been cruel TO Mr.. Henry
Berghf Let us look at it a moment. We
have no quarrel with him or with any gentle
man who has public work to do On the
contrary, we have liking for Mr.. Bergh,
feeling OF appreciation, not without respect.
But II he will insist upon fighting wind
mills We must speak on, mind, especially
when he permits his enthusiasm to overmas-
ter him, when there are no wlndmils in sight,
even to the extent of invading peoples houses
and grounds and private conveyaDoes in
search Of them. The world is broad enough
for Mr.. Bergh and his society. If the doing
Of his work, as laid down In the law, would
content him we should be satisfied. 1t is only
when he brings ridicule upon his society, full
of merit as it is, that we are called upon to
interfere.
Let US look the whole ground over seriously,
and see the follies and mistakes of which the
people have justly complained. Henry Bergh
is the President of the Society for the Proven
ton Of Cruelty to Animals. This society Is
the offspring of that kindly sentiment which
the Scriptures express when they tell us that
the meroifll man is merciful to his beast.
The humane gentlemen who founded It meant
to correct peculiar evil. They saw that
in many cases brutal, ignorant serving-people
inflicted pain upon the helpless animals en-
trusted to their care and in doing so not only
did deeds in themselves cruel and worthy of
punishment, but inflicted injury upon valu-
able property and generated harsh, uncbristian
feelings. Brutal deeds, even to the dumb ass,
that will not mend its PAGES with beating, only
encourage brutality and offences against the
public peace. So when benevolent men made
it their care to prevent these aots-to enforce
the just laws that provide feg their proven
tion-we felt that they had asstmed task
that was In many aspsots thahkless, and
therefore worthy Of special honor. And when
Mr.. Bergh gave his time and money to the
work, and seemed to be under fine entbu-
slasm iin its performance, We wished him well
and gave him ali praise.
But Mr.. Bsrgh went far beyond this! A
narrative Of his exploits would Be 50 much
like buresqds that it would be difficult
to have it credited. A sensible man charged
with this kindly mission would have known
just what to do. He would have seen at the
outset that great law of our existence was
that many animals must die that men may
live. He would have read in the sacred
books that the Lord found nothing more &C
ceptable in His eyes than a burnt Offering
of lambs and kids, and that the whole
Levitical dispensation was at variance with his
fantastic theories. He would have avoided
those re6nements of solicitude about turtle
and shellfsh and game which have brought so
much censure upon him. He would have re-
membered that birds are killed with shot, that
buffalo and deer are slain with rife balls that
oxen are felled with an axe, that swine are
stabbed with knives. He would have known
that, while all these means of death
are cruel, death itself is cruel, neces-
sary thing, and not within his province, Or the
province of any one, to prevent. He could not
but know that, following out the logic which
brought him into q state of passion with
tavern keepers for putting the doomed turtle
on Its back, to attract hungry, toothsome
wayfarers with the announcement of its
destiny In the way Of soup, he should have
prosecuted men for rlfting living oyster from
Its shell or plungng lively clam into boiling
water, or crushing the mites in an old English
cheese. The pity shown to an oyster should
certainly not be withheld from an innocent
mite seeking sustenance from old Cheshire or
Stllton.
The absurdity of this position did not
seem to impress the jealous Mr.. Bergh.
The humane powers given him by law
he abused. He took ground that clipping
horses was cruel, although the evidence of
experts is that it contributes to the animals
health. He interfered with private gentle
mems servants for Harvesting their horses
in their own way. No cruelty was intended,
none committed. Mr. Bergh had his theory
and pursued it. Then came his war upon
pigeon shooting. The pigeon is e-eminently
for food. The bird is Of really no domestic
use except az an element of pie. Pigeons
are raised aud sold for the kitchen.
Certain private gentlemen, fancying that there
would be profit and pleasure in improving
their skill as marksmen, formed clubs here and
elsewhere. We have clubs of the same
nature In France and England and Germany,
protected by laws of the severest tenure. The
| highest noblemen in these lands belong to
them-meu of honor, humanity and dis
erection. They shot various kinds Of
birds-whatever happened to belong to
the country. In America these clubs
selected the pigeon. Looked Of practically,
they simply purchased pigeons, killed theni
and gave them to the poor for food. The
only question :as! c0uls agss YES this -
"Was 1t any more cruel to kill bird with q
gun than with knife ?" Bergh never an
| novad tho hutChora FIR doaIin0 in r;~oona nor