The times., 1899-12-28


or about the time specified a boy on the
Conduit Road farm in question was Bit
ten by a dog, said dog being accused Of
having rabies. Unfortunately the diligent
inspector leaves it to the conjecture of
the public whether the dog bit the now
defunct and harmless COW or whether the
COW originally bit the dog He also neg
lected TO discover, or at least to state,
whether the dog alleged to have had the
rabies was slain after having been bitten
by the COW, or whether having bitten the
COW. he proceeded calmly on his way after
getting even with the boy who had prob
ably stoned him In fact there is nothing
conclusive to show that either the COW
or the dog had the hydrophobia except the
bald statement of the officials, who are
apt to stamp as rabies every physical man
Hesitation with which dog has had the
Temotest connection
However, on the strength of this volumi-
nous array Of information from the honor
able Secretary Of Agriculture and the
esteemed Health officer the illustrious
Board of District Commissioners was con
vened II extraordinary session, discussed
with a due sense of responsibility the
threatened outbreak of canine madness and
decided upon a heroic measure. They de-
termined that the safety OF the munici-
pality depended absolutely upon their
speedy action since not only nine dogs but
even a COW, grazing peacefully in its pas
ture yet likely to rush madIy through the
streets of the Capital, had been afflicted
with something that appeared to be rabies
during the past year. So the muzzle order
was drawn up and promulgated, and the
hardware dealers, who had been especially
disturbed by the fear that a great army
Of biting, swapping CANNES might uneX-
pectedIy invade their emporiums, breathed
q concerted sigh OF relief and Immediately
proceeded to celebrate by ordering signs
bearing the device "Muzzles for sale here"
In the explanatory statement made by
Mr. Ross. he exhibits considerable salts
faction in proving that the sapient board
of which he is a light of several candle
power had an unquestionable legal right
to issue the dog muzzling edict This Is
the only thing he does prove, and it seems
incredible that Congress should have per-
mitted the enactment of a statute that
would permit the arbitrary muzzling of
dogs in December, the one in which the
Commissioners have taken refuge for their
absurd action. But the fact remains that
on June 10, 1878, Congress did approve of
such a measure. and that the citizens Of
Washington are today reaplng the penalties
Of a case Of legislative mental alteration
twenty years Of age. It would be more in
credible, however TO believe that the ma
tionaI legislators viii permit this ridicu-
lous law to survive the present session and
remain in force to plague the innocent
dogs of Washington.
a statute giving the municipal author
ties the power to enforce the muzzling of
dogs in the midwinter season is as much
OF an imposition on the public as law de-
claring it a misdemeanor to appear in the
streets without overcoats- and fur caps in
August.
No doubt Commissioner Ross was inllu-
enced by the kindest motives in his newly
inaugurated dog crusade but there is such
a thing as sacrificing the rights of the pub
lie to crafty some supersensiuve indi-
viduals. Il appears that out OF his good
ness Of heart and his sympathy for the
august fears OF the Secretary of Agricul-
ture and the District Health officer, Mr..
Ross has lost sight Of the barbarous injus-
tice to the city's seyenty-five hundred in
offensive and eminently respectable dogs.
To these the wearing Of a muzzle is a tor
ture and an aggravatiou productive of a
nervous condition, a dumb protest that
would readily be diagnosed by the Bureau
Of Animal Industry as rabies, and proba-
bly endorsed as such by the Health Officer
and mis- enterprising inspectors. In his
tenderness of feeling for the excited state
Of the prominent officials mentioned, Mr..
Ross has likewise overlooked the lack of
fair play for the several thousands of citi-
zens who own the dogs and who naturally
object to doing that which is not only alb
surd, but inhumane, not to mention their
being compelled to go to useless expense
because two officials residing in Washing
ton are terrified at the prospect of some
ferocious lap dog escaping from its home.
suddenly contracting hydrophobia, and
Iacerating the distinguished persons Of the
citizens in question.
To furnish a strong climax for his ex-
planatory statement, Mr. Ross has at
tached detailed description OF the agonies
suffered by person afflicted with rabies.
and the perusal Of this alone is calculated
to frighten every nervous man, woman,
and child in the Capital half out Of their
wits. This feature OF Mr.. Ross statement
looks suspiciously like an effort to excite
public support OF an absurd crusade through
the artificial creation of fear where no
reason for trepidation exists.
It can scarcely be regarded as an eXag
geration. in view Of the ridiculous tendency
of recent official action, to venture the
opinion that, if the eccentricities Of GER
tain authorities become any more violent
than they are at the present time, there
viii be a second edict compelling all per-
sons to wear muzzles while on the public
thoroughfares, lest they may have at one
time or another been bitten by dog, and
are, on that supposition, likely to sud
denly bite one another. In fact the cur
rent paroxysms of alarm in the District
Building, the Department Of Agriculture,
and the domain of the Health Officer war
rant the suggestion that those who are
prosecuting the seventy hundred good
natured dogs Of Washington ought per-
haps to be made the subjects of an expert
diagnosis. The report Of an unprejudiced
expert, who is familiar with the symptoms
of hydrophobia. and the season when the
malady is likely to manifest itself, might
prove interesting.