Clarksville weekly chronicle. (Clarksville, Tenn.) 1873-1890, 1878-11-23
SHEEP VERSUS DOGS.

FOR q period OF years, stopping
somewhere short of the deluge, it
has been the practice of the Gen
eral Assembly OF the good State of
Tennessee to enact and repeal a dog
law alternately, according as sheep
or dogs obtained tine balance of
power in the body polite. 1t is the
sleeps turn in the session now APP
preaching, dog law having been
repealed at the last session after
vast difficulties and an immense
expenditure of legislative wisdom.
So now the Representatives of the
sheep interest have according to
immemOrable. usage to try their
turn. We hereby constitute our
selves their advocate, and, in be-
half of our worthy clients, venture
to propose a method of dealing with
the question, having greater promise
of permanence than such as have
been hitherto adopted.
The cause of the constant changes
in legislation which have hitherto
taken place and the agitation to
which they have given rise has
been that there are sheep cOmmu-
mites and dog communities, and as
one or the other has interested it.
self in politics, the sheep or the dog
has received the protection of the
law. Our proposition is that each
community shall determine for
itself whether it will have dog law
or not. Let a stringent law be en-
acted with a provisO attached to
it something similar to the the local
option clause adopted by some
States in reference to tipping
licences, so that each civil district
shall have the privilege of deter
mining by vote whether the dog
! law shall go into operation within
its boundaries, and let that vote
settle the matter for two years So
provided, the law would not be felt
grievance i'm these districts
where dogs were thought more of
/ than sheep, because it would not go
/ into operation in such districts,
while in sheep raising districts it
would probably be permanence,
being adopted afresh at each bien-
NAL period. The dog tax always
appeared to us as Il clumsy and
/ inefficient method of dealing with
/ the question. \ man who is rich
enough to pay the dog tax has no
more right to feed his pets on his
neighbOrS mutton than the poor
man, and when the law only goes
into operation where people are in
| favor of it, much stricter law will
be tolerated than the one which has
to be accommodated to the views
of both classes, the dog men and the
sheep men. Among the provisions
ofsuch a law we would suggest, with
others, the following:
!. Any man keeping dogs shall
be subject to a heavy fine for allow
sng them to go at large after night.
,. ANY dog who can be proved
to have killed or attacked a sheep
shall be put to death, it being made
the duty of the constable, of the dis
trict to execute the law.
3. The same death penalty to be
inflicted on any dog violating Sec
ton /.
4. No dog to be allowed to go at
large night or day without a collar
having the owners name plainly
engraved on it, Dogs not SO provided
/ to be shot on sight and their owners
fined.
). When the dog owner offending
against these laws is bankrupt so
that a fine cannot be collected his
dogs shall always be subject to exc
cution, all exemption laws to the
contrary Notwithstanding.
6. This section is to provide for
the case of two contiguous sections,
one voting the dog law and the other
rejecting i'll Any dog, wherever
his his owner shall live, shall be
subject to the dog law of a district
whenever he is within the limits of
that district.
Many other clauses could be sug-
gested by our country friends who
who know how the thing works,
and a really efficient law could be
enacted without enlisting opposition
in those districts which prefer dogs
to sheep, simply because in such
districts it would no. 30 into opera
ton.
Our friend, Commissioner Kille-
brew, is the man to engineer such
measure through the]neXt Legis-
lature. Will he not fake counsel
With some of his many country