The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1875-10-29

with finance, had at the same time thrust
upon them the dog question, their pcnt-up
human feelings boiled up within them aud
they were wholc-souled men again.
The dog question was thrust upon our
ohio friends in the way Of proposed
amendment of the state Constitution. 1t
was right that matter concerning the
welfare OF so large share Of the inhabi-
tants OF the state should he deemed worthy
Of reference 90 all the people for settle
mcnt. The dogs themselves caunot yet
vote. Therefore their legal guardians
stood in the breach and took charge of
their rights. The constitutional amend
ment proposed was for tax on dogs. Ii
was case Of taxation without representa-
tion-alwavs odious to Il free people ohio
rallied TO the side of the dogs. We do not
hear that HAYES or ALLEN or Cary dis
cussod the constitutional amendment SUBJ
mitied to the people. Mr. lIAfSrEAD, ii
he did not ignore yet failed TO give the
dog issue prominence in the Cincinnati
Commercial. Even Deacon RicHARD SMITH,
though 2 truly good man aud ~ such mer-
cful to h,s beast, yet failed to fire the Ohio
heart on the dog question. These two
eminent publici.ts had other fish TO fry.
But what Of the people of ONO? Dld they
forget the dogs: No; they rejected the
proposed amendment 10y II majority more
than three times us great as that they gave
against BILL ALLEN, whom HALsrEAD and
the Deacon fought with all their intel
lcctual might The majority against BILL
ALLEN was about 1900; for tho dogs, nearly
= "a and no
truly good editors sometimes in their reach
after material questions, fail to grasp those
which lay hold on the hearts Of the people!
But is the dog tax forever removed from
political discussion, IL we trust rag money
l.? 1t is not In several states II Is already
imposed. In others where il does not exist
IL will doubtless be proposed. \ dog tax
has strong arguments IN II. favor but we
shall not mention them. We do. however,
strenuOusly advise a tax amounting to
prohibition on bad dogs in every state.
Hopeless of taxing bad men out of the
country, we cling TO the opportunity of
taxing bad dogs out of existence. There
are dogs destitute OF principle, lazy.
greedy, ana lost in total dcpraVity They
know no repentance for SIN They steal,
and conscience never pricks them. Dis
covery alone brings down their impudent
tails. Whereas the good dog suffers openly
for his secret sins. Conscience puIsucs
him rs he sleeps and rs he wakes. His
masters smile awakens the pangs Of re-
morse. such dog may fall into wicked
Hess, but he does not become morally
blasted. When we see dog Sinking
away. tail between legs from the theft of
a bone or chop which he las stolen with
out detection by the owner, and thereafter
for hours in solitude suffering the pangs OF
Tcmoise, We have hopes of that dog. But
if he only licis his chops and ways his tai
and barlSs decepuvcly, we know he il lost
in sin. These latter dogs should be taxed
at high rate. They deserve their fate.
The Others should he brought under good
moral influences, and their sensitive con-
sciences saved from the soaring OF con-
tinual misiicr's
These thoughts on logs are pertinent to
these daya. for the distinctions that pre-
vail among dogs A. To moral condition
equally prevail among men. We COM
mend them 10 the consideration of Messrs
MOODY and SANKEY. There is q great
deal to be learned from the study of
dogs. Morally, we must add, they have
the advantage OF many men, and even Of
some preachers.