The Saint Paul globe., 1897-05-18
FRIGHT. NOT RABIES
NO DULY AUTHENTICATED CASE
EVER KNOWN IN ST. PAUL
TILL '95.
NOR SINCE. so FAR AS KNOWN.
w. e. BRAAIEALL POINTED RE
MARKS ABOUT DIR. STONE AND
DIR. PRICE,
NOR SINCE. so FAR AS KNOWN
AND THE PIONEER PRESS AS WELL
Friends of the Dog and Humanity
Protest Against Assemblyman
Ddx's Ordinance.

The amended dog ordinance which
passed the board Of aldermen at the
last session Of that body came before
the committee on streets Of the as
sembly, yesterday afternoon. The prin-
|. cipal change in the ordinance from
the one in effect now Is that the muzzl-
ing period is not fixed, but is left with
the council to order the dogs muzzled
whenever in the judgment of that body
it is considered necessary. The ordi-
nance now in force, and which is the
production Of Assemblynran Dix, pro-
vides that all CANNES shall be muzzled
from May 1 to Sept. 80, and the one to
be passed by the assembly Thursday
night as recommended by the commit
tee strikes out this clause.
Rev. w. r. Lord, speaking in favor
of the amended ordinance, said it was
inhuman to muzzle dogs. He made
! light Of the rabies scare, which, he
stated, was worked up by a. certain
newspaper and the health department.
In his opinion the scare would subside
as soon as the discussion Of the ques-
tion stopped.
w. E. Bramhall said the health de-
partment had not furnished evidence
of single case of rabies. DR.. Price
was a veterinarian and DR.. Stone was a
specialist. Neither Of the gentlemen
knew anything more about rabies than
any one else who could read books on
the subject. Mr.. Bramhall said it was
nothing less than criminal on the part
Of the health department, whether it
acted as agent for patent muzzle or
| not, to keep up the constant talk about
| rabies. It created a nervousness among
the people, especially the women and
children, and did more harm that all
the rabies could. It was time a, halt
was called, and st. Paul not advertised,
like Constantinople, as having 10000
dogs and all mad. The best writers
had stated that there was a disease
produced by fear which was so near
akin to rabies that doctors were unable
to tell whether it was or not until
after death. The local health depart
ment authorities had acknowledged
that rabies was more likely to affect
dogs in winter than in summer, and
If this was true the animals should be
muZzled in winter rather than in sum-
mer. A muzzle on a dog made him
savage and dangerous when it was
taken off. It created sickness among
the animals and afforded them no pro-
lection against the army of ownerless
dogs, who roved the streets and neither
were licensed nor muzz1ed. Dogs and
valuable ones, he said, would be mnz-,
zled and put to torture. while tramp
dogs would not be. The Pioneer Press,
he stated, had done more In the past
few months to break down the health
of people than all the mad dogs that
ever existed. That paper had scare
headlines announcing that there was
another mad dog killed, and then down
at the end Of the article in small type,
would be line or so stating that it
was not known If the animal was rabid
or not. The editor Of the paper, Mr..
Bramha1 said, disturbed in an after
mood rap by the barking of dog, i'm
mediately rushed to his office and in
dited an editorial about mad dogs This
particular part Of Mr.. Bramhalrs talk
was received with loud applause by
the audience Of fifty persons, who were
present at the meeting to urge the re-
peal of the n1zzling clause of the pres
ent ordinance.
T. A. Abbott called attention to a
circular issued by DR.. Hewitt, secre-
tary Of the state board Of health, in
1895, in which that official stated that
there had not been an authentic case
Of rabies in st. Paul This statement,
Mr.. Abbott said, had been called forth
by the Pioneer Press's charge that two
persons employed in the Northern Pa
cific railroad offices had died from
rabies.
E. w. Peet thought it was a good
thing that the present ordinance pun
ished the owners for not providing
muzzles instead of the dogs. If there
was any one thing that tended to make
dogs mad and savage, it was, in his
opinion, to nuzz1e them. He hoped the
committee would recommend and the
assembly pass the amended ordinance,
which would not fix the period from
May to Sept. 30, in which dogs should
be muzzled.
Mr.. Bran1f,all suggested to the COM
mittee that the license on female dogs
should be reduced from 81 to a much
smaller amount. He cited the case Of
a poor woman who was obliged yester-
day to give up valuable pet to
dog catcher because she could not afford
to pay the 81 fee. The dog catcher, he
said, had no right to go to the wonsan's
house and demand the animal,c but she
thought he had, and So t11es dog was
carried eff. nIsd'
The ordinance was recommended fo