The evening times., 1899-12-23
Views OF Mr.. DUVALL
His Opinions Concerning the Dog
Muzzling Edict.
An Analysis of the Legal Aspects
of the Matter Advanced-Criticis
by Prominent Citixens-Omcial
NeedIessly Alarmed Only Two
Gases of Real Rabies Reported.

Owing to the many adverse criticisms of
the order of the District Commissioners, to
compel all owners of dogs to provide
muzzles for the animals 10 protect them
from the dog catcher, a Times reporter
today interviewed A B. Duvall, the At
torney for the District, for the purpose of
ascertaining precisely the authority pos
sessed by the Commissioners in the prem
ises. Mr.. Duvall quoted the law under
which the Commissioners have acted. He
said that the powers of the Commission
ers in respect to the control of dogs was
conferred by an act of Congress, June 10,
1878 which reads as follows:
Chap. S2S. An act TO create revenue in the
District OF Columbia, by levAing upon all
dogs therein, 10 make such dogs personal prop
efiy, and for other purposes.
Sec. :. Whenever it shall be made 10 appear to
the Commissioners that there good reasons
for believeing that any dog or dogs within the
District mad, il shall be the duty of the
Commissioners to issue proclamation requiring
that all dogs shall, for period 10 be defined IN
the proclamation, wear good, substantial muzzles;
and any dog going large during the period de-
fined by the Commissioners without such muzze
shall be taken by the poundmaster and inpound-
ed, subject TO the provisions of section three.
Mr.. Duvall also referred to a unanimous
decision Of the United States Supreme
Court, the opinion being delivered by Mr..
Justice Brown, in the discussion on the
subject of property in dogs and the consti-
tutional authority of legislatures or Con-
gress TO regulate the subject, in the case of
Sentell VS.. No. & C. R., loo U. s., 69S,
which was delivered March, 1897.
Mr.. Duvall said that if the situation was
hnr1 1s-hf
themselves 10 blame, for it has been on
the books for two decades. 1t should have
been repealed if the people found it TO be
unjust. He admitted that the statute made
it discretionary with the Commissioners
TO act, for it must be made to appear to
the Commissioners that there are good rea-
sons for believing that any deg or dogs
within the District are mad
When convinced that the necessity for
protecting the community from mad dogs
is one that requires drastic measures, the
Commissioners have no option. but must
issue proclamation ordering all dogs muZ-
zled.
The statute just quoted was shown to a
number OF prominent men today. and they
expressed unqualified surprise that il ex-
listed.
1T has been dead letter for almost
generation" said one OF the men, land /
cannot understand why ii should now be
Tesurrected. l am certain that there is at
present no greater danger 10 people from
mad dogs than there has been since the en-
actment Of the statute.
1T appears 20 me that the Commissioners
have been unnecessarily alarmed. So far
as | can remember there never has been a
time in any city that was absolutely free
from rabies, and there never will be until
no dogs whatsoever are permitted within a
city's limits. Muzzling all dogs because OF
fear that one or two dogs may develop
rabies is sheer nonsense.
''Scme people will not obey the order.
and will evade II by keeping their dogs
chained up in their grounds. Who knows
but that it will be these very dogs that will
exhibit symptoms of rabies?
IF this should be the case, the more
than 1000 other licensed dogs have been
put TO an unnecessary torture because of
being forced to wear muzZles II all dogs
should be muZzled in compliance with the
requirements OF the proclamation, perhaps
the order. obnoxious as it is. would not
be so strongly objected TO. but this is not |
and will not be the case.
Tramp dogs will never be removed from |
the streets unless the Poundmaster becomes |
vastly more active that he has been in the |
past and as ! have already said. some |
owners of licensed dogs will refuse TO |
muzzle them.
Il am of the opinion that the Commits
sioners have been too timid in this matter, |
and that their terror. of imaginary cases of |
hydropho5ia is TO be both pitied and CEN
sured."
Another gentleman. after reading the |
law under which the Commissioners have |
acted, said:
The course that has been pursued by
the Commissioners is, probably. in COM |
pliance with the law. but their action was |
grossly exaggerated by their fears | am
Informed that there have been but two
cases of rabies this month. The official |
diagnosis of the Bureau of Animal Indus
try up to a day or two ago discovered |
but two cases of rabies in dogs. If there
are 1853 licensed dogs in the District, |
there must be total of licensed and un-
licensed dogs that approximates 10000.
Where in time of official excitement and
apprehension but two cases of rabies are |
found in 10000 dogs. it seems to me that I
the pe.sentage is about as low as any rea-
sonabie person could expect.
From such facts as these ! am unable 20
understand why the Commissioners sioud d
have been so alarmed that they deeme1 il |
proper to practically imprison all dogs for
a muzzle on dog is irritating as con-
finement in a Jail would be TO a man.
1T is to be presumed that the Commits
sioners acted within the law, but il is
plainly evident that they did not exercise
the discretionary power they are given by
the act OF Congress under which they pro-
ceeded. The proclamation issued by the
District Commissioners is the most un-
popular document that ever emanated from
the Municipal Building.
A dozen other gentlemen denounced tire |
muzZling order in terms similar TO those
quoted.