Port Tobacco times, and Charles County advertiser. (Port Tobacco, Md.) 1845-1898, 1884-06-06
&armers' Column.
Protecting Sheep Against Dogs.

The Belair, Hartford county, H'gis
furnishes report of the May meeting
of the Deer Greek Farmers Club, from
which We make the following extracts
of some of the remarks submitted on
the occasion:
Mr.. S. B. Silver said: Every farmer
knows the value of small bunch Of
sheep, and it is necessary to have some
protection for them. His sheep are
housed every night, but he has FIRE
quently been aroused in the night by
the barking of dogs around his sheep
pen, and been obliged to get up and
drive them away. 1t is we'll to have
good shepherd dog to assist in driv-
ing the sheep from one part of the
farm to the other. Sheep increase
rapidly and the wool and lambs are
profitable. A neighbor, John Carr.
mad sold $110 worth of lambs and
wool in one year from 9 or 10 sheep
On account of dogs sheep must be put
into house every night, but they do
better IN the fields. Tn warm weather
they feed chiefly at light. They hud-
die together on the knolls, which are
always the poorest spots, and enrich
them by their droppings. Sheep are
few in number comparison with other
branches Of farming, but if we had
some protection from dogs every far.
mer could have few and find them a
source of great profit. He did not
know what measure of protection to
suggest, as majority of persons seem
to prefer dogs to sheep.
Mr.. Moore said that at the next as.
sessment dogs should be assessed and
be made respectable animals in the
eyes of the law. If the owner cannot
be taxed, from not having a sufficient
amountof property, let the dog be out
lawed. Owners ought to be response
BILE for the damage done by their dogs.
Dog laws are unpopular because there
are ten dog owners to one sheep own
err. Encourage people to raise more
sheep and dog law would soon be-
come popular. In Cecil county no
man could 60 to the Legislature if he
were opposed to dog law, while in
Hartford the reverse is the case. We
have dog law in Hartford, but it is
unpopular, and it must be because it
is not good law. The keeping of
sheep would be profitable to the indi
vidual and also to the community.
VIM. Webster said be had wondered
for Is years, how such an intelligent
class of people as the farmers Of Har-
ford could have had patience to per-
NIT so many Legislatures to pass with
out demanding dog law. Thirty
years ago it might have been unpopu-
lar, but it is not now. He was friend
to the dog. but greater friend to the
sheep Dogs are not property, aud if
they can be allowed to deprive u; of
our property and taxes, there is some
thing wrong. Dog laws work we'll in
the Western States and ia Cecil and
Chester counties. Why not in Har-
ford? Mr.. Webster had read letter
from the editor of the Elkton Wing.
who spoke of the efficiency of the dog
law for that county. In 1888 the
sheep awards amounted to $4O0 and
1880 was turned over to the school
fund.
The Cecil law imposes a tax upon
ownersof dogs upwards of two months
old of 81 on each male. and So on each
female dog, to be collected by the tax
collectors. All dogs upon which no
tax is paid before the LIST of April,
must be killed by the collectors under
penalty of from $40 to 500. The
fee for killing dogs, and the awards for
sheep destroyed or injured are paid out
of the dog tax fund.
Mr.. Webster said the law was so
popular in Cecil that no one could be
elected to the Legislature if opposed
to it. In Chester county fox hunter
whose hounds frightened some sheep
and prevented them from feeding
properly afterwards, was fined $500.
If we had dog law We could afford to
keep fine sheep. If more sheep were
kept here it would be better for the
farmer, the mechanic and everybody.
Sheep are benefit to rich land, and a
greater benefit to poor land. He
would put these words in every farm
er's mouth until the next Legislature
meets: sGiye us dog law p