The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1877-03-08
THE DOG NUISANCE.


ALDERMAN cowING's DOG ORDINANCE MEETS
WITH GENERAL APPRovAL~--MAyoR ELY M
DoRsRs IT--soME IMPORTANT AMENDMENTS
SUGGESTED
The inlerminabe dog question has come up again.
We have been scientifically nspny xiating CANNES,
we have been drowning them cruelty In tanks, to the
horror OF the good Mr. Bergh, but still they come.
They increase SO fast that they threaten to make
another Constantnopo Of New York. They wake
at night they bite children during the day and
they are horrible nuisance all the time Alderman
Morris was the FIRST OF our City Fathers who rocog.
nzed the importance OF Kidding the metropolis OF this
great public annoyance; but that his
ordinance is repealed Alderman Cowing has
stepped IN with another ordinance, which
imposes tax OF So upon every dos and condemns all
unlicensed dogs running at large to destruction. The
ordinance referred to the Law Committee OF the
Board at the meeting of tho Aldermen Thursday last
That committee has not yet met, and It is somewhat
nauspcious iorthe prospects OF the ordinance that
the chairman OF the committee, Mr. Lewis confessed
himself as being opposed to the 'invdious dlstinc-
ton" which the ordinance made between the rich dog
and tho poor dog.
LEWIS oBJEcroNa
Mr.. Lewis called upon yesterday, and ne said
that as tar the destruction OF tho dogs running
large was concerned he approved OF the ordinance
as to putting beloved CANNES and muz-
zling thep, he was decidedly opposed to that
suppose you have a dog" SAID Mr.. Lewis,
''whom you fondly cherish and you able pay
the tax OF So, would It not be cruel compel you
give him up see him dcsroyedf Some people
brought up their dogs from infancy. and dcvotody
attached to them, and would 1t be right because they
are too poor to pay So, to seize thcm the nrst time
they are seen upon the street and destroy thems And
as to muzzling them you know that nothing is more
effective IN producing hydrophoba than thats"
Mr. REASONS
Alderman Cowng, tho mover OF tho ordinance (who
will be creditably remembered beng the minority
member of the Railroad Committee who favored
the experiment OF heating the cars) gave
some cosent reasons Tor the ordinance. He
SAID there was no doubt that something must
be done 10 rid the streets or tho horrd hordes OF
mongrcl ours which infested them, which made tho
nights hldcous by their dismal hows, aud du even
make the days particularly agreeable III suppose
there arc some ~, 600 $4,000 dogs In the city.
ThousanGs OF them are unsphtly disgusting IN an.
pearancc. oil earthly anybody, and not only
constant eyesorc, but also daily threat TO the lives
OF our children Only the other DAY Alderman Morris
told ne OF child having had It's nose bitten off by
dog In HUDSON street, and every one who has read tho
HERALD knows what dcprcdations the poisonous Spiz
has made Now II Is sale to say that II license is
exacled three Iourths oil these dogs will DO suffered
TO 60 to destruction. dog Is u luxury, and
| If SO why should the owner not pay tax II
any other luxury? II this ord nance passed do
not suppose that more than 10 900 licenses will DO
taken a1u the revenue from source would be
sufficient delray the expenses oil extcrminalng all
the worthless ours OF tue metropolis IL a dog Is
properly housed aud kept within DOORS OF this
ordinance VIII not Interfere with hG., but II ne roams
at large he should DO destroyed jus, cattle
would be. AS 10 Alderman Lewis objection that am
drawing invdious distinction between rich poor
dogs, assure you that thought never entered my
mind. If dog Is not worth paying small
tax on | sure no Is not worth keep
log. That this question demands our urgent
attention cannot be questioned. The legislatures OF
several States OF New Jersey and Massach use,ts
tnA n a
termination OF all dogs running al large or OF Danger
Gus breed, and am sure we ought 10 do something
from respectable citizens since introduced the ordi-
nance IN approval OF It's provisions, and they prove to
me the existence OF a general feeling that some
remedy Tor this growing nuisance Is urgently needed
MAYOR ELY OPPOSED DOGS PETS
Mayor Ely Is also opposed TO dogs and, although In.
clned TO treat tho subject facetously, our worthy
chief magistrate indicated that II the ordinance pro.
posed by Alderman Cowing or ono similar in It's pro.
visions were passed he would give 1t his approval.
~ opposed to dogs sad he; 'dogs pets aud
have no pe.s--tho CITY Is my only pot"
| "Would you not even spare pretty little In pdog
fresh from ady's boudor from the pound Of dosIruo
tion?"
have equality before the law or course, we all know
respectable dog when we see him-a dog of fastldi-
| Gus associations and exclusive connections dog
who moves 10 good society; but, SIR, II tho drcad nat
goes forth that unlicensed dogs running at largo
muzzed shall be destroyed 1t must DO enforced"
soME ADVISABLE AMENDMENTS.
The Law Committee will probably meet this morn
ing and take the subject into consideration, be
|
meeting. Mr. LOWS is anxious to agree with
MI Cowing upon some compromise which
tho M Board '''g there is no doubt sha. the
ordinance proposed by Alderman Cowing is capable of
being improved ana enlarged IN many respects, and Mr.
Cowing himself will be glad OF any advisable amend
ments which may be offered. Probably the most I'M
portant amendment that DO offered would be pro-
vision requiring the Board OF Health 10 examine
poisonous character OF the Spitz In to
whether II compatible with due for the
lives of our citizens TO tolerate this dangerous breed
| A
ordered by the Massachusetts Legislature. Another
amendment which might prove advantageous would
be TO forbid dogs street cars and omnbuscs,
which they are often an unmigatcd nuisance. IL is
no very sight to see lady entering car with a
vicious little black and tan other got
who keeps barking and swapping at every pas
sengcr and clears quite formidable space
around HIM. II dirty clothes arc to be tabooed IN
why also dogs? As regards the lcens-
ing OF dogs 1t might be well TO grade the tax Why
that of a $500 fancy setters Gould the tax not be
graded that there shall be licenses tor 49, So and
$15, according to tho dogs valney In rural Now Jcr
soy the dog license Is 81 ana other States, well
most countries In Europe, exact dog tax. Tho Paris
municipal govern derives quite very respectable
rovcnucabout $50 900 ycar--trom the dog TAX, and
there is probably no capital OF the world where tho
odous mOngrel street cur Is so vigantly suppressed
In England the dog tax varies from i've to thirty
sh!lllngs, and In Germany 1t also varies In different
States
To show the interest which Is quite generally taken
In the subject the following extract from the letter OF
wealthy resident OF Fifth avenue may be pended.
The letter is only one out OF many OF similar purport:
Alderman CowixG:-
DEAR SIR-Alhough have not tho pleasure OF q per-
sonal acquaintance with do such in
justice my feelings my hearty thank
ILLNESS the ordinance all
wandering through the streets unlicensed to DO captured
and destroyed Our ha, long been disgraced with vile
whose propensity Ut this season Of the Is disgust
ing in the extreme nothing of the hcnon offence
su6Iecting men. women children the Imminent
ger losing their lives by most hcarrendng death.
IL Is to be hoped that our City Fathers will tai
prompt action in this matter and give our dos riddle
| city the relief IL asks
| ------------
THAT WARDROBE STILL.