The aegis & intelligencer. [volume] (Bel Air, Md.) 1864-1923, 1875-01-15
MI isc eIIaneous
The Dog Law.

| EDITOR OF THE 4EGIs: 1t has been nv nten
tlon, for some time past, TO give you some view
| upon the Dog Law; otherwise irreyerently call
ed by those who have not the fear of the wratl
| OF our law makers before them, the "Dogged'
| Law. The interposition of circumstances, how
| ever, has hitherto stayed the execution of thi.
| design.
Inc majority of the persons with whom
| have conversed, agree with me that the law is .
| failure and nuisance; and the mere statemen,
! of its operation must make this fact apparent
| TO the most obtuse intellect
| The prime object of the law, as We must pre-
sumo, was to diminish the number of dogs, and
| in the same ratio, diminish the loss of sheep.
Let us see to what extent these objects have
| been attained
The law contains proviso allowing every
household the privilege of keeping ono dog free
OF ta * TRs appears To- your eorresDon-
| of the law. The second error is that the officer
is not permitted to kill an unpaid-for dog
wherever found and the third error is that the
| law is so constructed that all of the amount
collected, or ut least the greater part of it,
| goes into the pockets of the collector.
Soon after the adjournment of the last session
of our Legislature, the writer had q converse
| ton with one of the leading members from this
| county upon this subject. The member re.
marked that dog taxes were generally unpopu-
| lar; and in order to render the present law ac-
ceptable to the masses, it was in the interest of
| policy to permit each family 10 keep one dog
| free Policy, that is the political watchword
| Why do our legislators wish to pass any law
| that does not serve the best interests and COM
mand the approval of the majority of their con-
sttuents? With the hope of making the law
popular, it has been rendered absolutely nupu-
| tory in its operation, and source of ANNOYANCE
| to all concerned. In the first place, let us see
what profit the county derives from the tax
Every household is allowed to keep one dog (of
whatever sex, or pedigree) free of charg, and
U nrnyi1pe n tnT
ploys an officer to furnish it free of charge So
| far the revenue is on the wrong side. In the
next place, there is a tax of one dollar OH each
| and every dog that is kept in addition to the
| free one. How is this tax collected? The law
authorizes the collection to be made by the con.
| stables of the county; and they are allowed as
| their fee, twenty-five per cent. of the amount
| collected for each dog. In event of the owner
declining to pay the tax on his dog the only pen
atty for non payments that the constable is en-
powered to kill the said dog, or dogs, "provided
he can find them off of the property ofthc owner
| and, in that case, the county mot tho owner)
pays the officer fifty cents. Neither is this prof
liable to the county treasury. There is still
another view to be taken of this financial ar
| rangement. Suppose an individual owns three
| Dogs one is tagged free, one is paid the dollar
for, and the third, an old, worthless dog is per.
| mitted by the owner to be dispatched by the
constable. In that case the officer retains sew
enty five per cent. of the amount collected, viz
twenty. five for the dog taxed, and fifty for the
| log killed. 1t is still possible under the law
for a stronger case to be presented: for instance,
| if man pays tax on one dog,an has two killed,
| the constable not odly keeps all he collects, but
the county is bound to pay him twenty five
| cents more!
1t is difficult to imagine more preposterous
law. The people are not willing to throw away
| their money in that way. Neither the owners
| of sheep, nor the county treasury are benefited
in the slightest degree, while as before remark
ed the people are subjected to much petty anoy.
apce A number of our best citizens refuse 10
| pay the tax for these reasons and many, who
keep several dogs, have never been called upon
| by the collector
In thus referring to this absurd and ridiculous
dog law 1--WE beg pardon of our legislators II
any are sensitive on the subject), we are not TO
| be understood as opposing taxation on dogs.
On the contrary, we advocates law that will re-
ally diminish the number of dogs, and likewise
produce substantial revenue to the resources
of the county treasury. To attain these results
let law be framed by the next Legislature (for
nobody will pay the present tax for another
year, requiring that the owner of every male
dog shall pay tax of one dollar EACH and that
the owner of every female dog shall pay tax
of five dollars each; and that the said tax shall
be collected in the same manner as taxes on 9th.
er property, and by the regular taX-colectors
of the several districts they receiving no more
than the usual per centum for the same.
Besides increasing the revenue of the county
such law would have q decided tendency tc
Improve the stock of dogs. Under such law
q large majority of the people would keep, a
lea one dog, and, having to pay the tax, they
woulI not be likely to have worthless ours abou
them. The tax on females being five times thai
on the male, the presumption is that very few
private individuals would keep one. Thus, tn,
raising of dogs would fall into the hands of doc
fanciers, where 1t should be, who would have
the incentive to produce pure blooded animals
of the various species, well knowing that the,
could readily dispose of them at remuneratv,
prices.
Under the operation of such law 1t Is easy tt
foresee how dogs would become reduced il
numbers-to the greater security Of Sheppard
be improved in quality.
1t is true that there would be difficulty in col
Letting the tax in some cases since the greater
number of dogs really possess no monied val
ne. There are few individuals, however, who
1.-Two In any kind of house, whether they hay,
other taxable property or not, that have MOI
sufficient means TO pay this tax, If they wished
10 keep dog. The few that might evads the
law, could not long Withstand the popular will