The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1899-03-31
Adrfrhsfmtnt.

Troy or Albany Office.
CHARLES II. PLANK. sup't Animal Dept.
Troy or Albany Oficc.
INDEPENDENTS.
HARVEY s.. Mcleod. Troy.
Col. WILLIAM &. RICE. Albany.
Rev. c. B. F. PEASE. Watcrvliet.
NJ. ANDRAE. Cohoes.
N. B. POWERS. Lan%sIngburgh.
NJ. d. SCHOONMAKER. Waterford.
W. A. WOOD. Jr.. Hoosick Falls.
FOR CHILDREN AND ANIMALS.
ue,3so cared for to Jan. 1. 1881
PRINCIPAL OFFICES:
Albany ONCE. 2S7 state st.
Troy Office. 10 4th ct.
ALBANY. n. Y, March 81. 1890.
Hon. Eibridg. T. Gerrv. No. :97 Fourth Arenue. Ne,c
York CRY.
DEAR SIR: l observe that The New York Sun
OF Sunday. March ~. 1890. under the heading
OF Gerry stirs Up the s. T. C. A." makes GER
tain statements concerning yourself which
from my personal knowledge are absolutely
untrue. misleading and unjust. The New York
Evening Post declares you introduced a new
State dog license law. This is absolutely false.
as you have had nothing to do with the bill re-
ferred to except to give a legal opinion. by re-
quest. after the bill had been drawn UP I'M
known to you. on the constitutionality OF the
proposed law.
The statements in regard to yourself. as re-
ported from the hearing before the Cities Com
mittee Of the Assembly. while considering As
aembly Bill No. $50. are incorrect:
FIRST. / did not read your letter. as stated.
but only three sentences therefrom. Second.
l did not read or state that you signed the let
ter as a Vice. President OF the American Society
for the Prevention Of Cruelty to Animals.
-. NJ IAtE1- AT -~k a-t- q o a -,-, -.---I
in that way. Fourth. I did not show the letter
to Mr.. flames and he did not examine It as
stated. 1t was never in his hands or open near
him. Fifth. Mr.. Haines did not see that It was
written on the official letterhead Of the Amer
lean Society" as stated. for he did not see Il at
all as he claims in said article Except the back
OF the letter several feet away. and 1t was not
written on such a letterhead. Consequently
the resolutions passed by his society in con-
domination OF your alleged act were due to a
creation OF his own or somebody else's fancy
which had no existence whatever in reality. 1t
was not stated that you expressed the opinion
cited In any official capacity whatever.
What really took place at the Assembly
Cities Committee hearing on Assembly Bill
No. $50. was as follows: Mr.. Haines read some
statements In opposition to the measure. and
in reply I stated that the bill was similar in
character and provisions to his own dog license
law in New York city. except that It sought to
cure the constitutional defects OF his law and
OF the old State law which was a counterpart OF
his. but which had been declared unconstitu-
tional. l further stated that the proposed law
did not affect him or his society in any way. I
then stated that a Vice President Of his own
society. the Hon. Elbridge T. Gerry. did not
share his opinion, and quoted as follows from
your letter to me dated February 20. 1909: Il
do not understand upon what ground Mr..
Haines can successfully oppose your Dog Ii
cense Bill ASSEMBLY Bill No. 500. which ap-
pears to be in perfect shape. The first section
expressly limits it's application to cities Of the
second and third class. AS the measure now
reads. the law relating to New York city Laws
OF 1905. Chap. 4l2l is not repealed. although
its provisions. II questioned in court. would I'M
doubtedly be paralyzed by the decision Of the
Supreme Court in the Fox case"
When I finished the quotation. Chairman
Mazet inquired OF me II you had written the
letter Just read from. I replied that you had.
and placed it in his hands. The letter was
read by him in my presence and returned
folded to me by a messenger at once. and no
one to my knowledge has seen the same out
side OF your office or my own. except Chairman
Mazet. From this IL will be seen that the
statement in The Sun that MIR. Haines saw
that the letter was written on the offcial. letter
head OF The American Society forthe Prevention
OF Cruelty to Animals" Is obviously untrue.
and the statement in the preamble adopted
reciting this alleged fact is therefore founded
on n Misrepresentation.
1t Is unnecessary to make any further eN-
plantations in regard to this episode. Mr.. Haines
has seen At to oppose certain bills in the Leg
~islature, In the past. In which l was interested.
but they all became avs. Assembly Bill No.
$50 was prepared by Judge Cady. OF Syracuse.
at the request OF the Syracuse 8. T. G. A.. and
was introduced by Assemblyman Sabine from
that city. AS Chairman OF the Committee on
Legislation for Animals. OF the New York State
Convention % Societies for tho Prevention OF
Cruelty IA position formerly held by Mr..
Hainesl. l was obliged to declare for or against
the bill. I solicited the opinions OF several
eminent lawyers. among others yourself. on
the constitutionality Of the bill. and whether it
would affect New York City. Hence your letter
which was quoted from. The bill was declared
sound by all. Icannot conceive the grounds
for Mr.. Haines's opposition unless 1t be pique
and personal resentment to myself. You were
in no way cognizant Of the preparation Of As
sembly Bill No. $50. or interested in it in any
way. You. however. did suggest after looking
it over that Mr.. Haines ought to be appointed
one OF the State Commissioners a courtesy
which seems hardly to have been appreci-
ated. ! append a correct copy Of your letter to
me. in full.
Regretting that you should have been sub
ject to Misrepresentation after a lifelong. I'M
selfish and often heroic devotion to the cause
OF humanity. without Just ground having been
given for such treatment ! am very respect
fully yours. W. O.. STILLMAN.
Dictated President. etc.
?. S.-The copy OF your letter herein in
closed. / have compared very carefully with
the original. and 1t is az nearly a duplicate as
can be prepared on a typewriter. w. o. S.