The evening times., 1900-03-21

The meeting which was called for last
night at the National Rifles Armory by
George w. Evans for the supporters OF
the movement for resembling the dog
muzZling order was well attended. or the
sixty-lve persons present ffty-fve we're
women. Mr.. Evans called the meeting to
order and stated its object He said it
would be cruelty 20 continue this ordi-
nance in force during the hot season, and
he would like to hear opinions regarding
the most effective way Of expunging the
same from the order books OF the Dis
trict.
George A. HILL OF the Naval Observa-
tory, said there had been a society regu-
larly organized for the same purpose.
which had full set Of officers. and which
already had taken steps toward the at
tainment Of the end in view. The case
is now in the courts" Mr.. Hill continued,
"and 1t would be best TO get together
with this regular organization and work
with il. and thus strengthen the move
ment. There is no way, however. by
which this order can be repealed unless
the uncOnstitutionality Of the same be es-
tablished"
To this Mr.. Evans replied that the
meeting had been called irrespective OF
any existing organization: that everybody
was welcome to IL. every citizen and
friend Of the dog He stated that a re-
Specuul petition TO the District Commis-
sioners would be Of more value and rave
better results tGan the method Of going
from one court TO another to antagonize
the law and the authorities.
Dennis O'COnnOT. at this juncture. NOV
ed 10 elect Mr.. Evans chairman OF tho
meeting. and the motion WAS carried.
The chairman then read a statement Of
the sum OF which the dog owners OF the
District we're being mulCted." He said
that Congress appropriated the sum CT
t33,9O0 for the "sustenance OF the Health
Officer. Poundmaster. and his brute
catchers.' " Mr.. Evans alleged that dog
owners paid 81. 900 tag money and 81. 900
for redeeming imPOunded dogs. more than
half the amount appropriated by Congress
for the support OF the Health Department
OF the District
Mrs O'Doaahue. member OF the HUI
name Society Of the District said that
lord Pauncsiote was responsible for the
special order: that he brought his infiu-
ence 10 beav on the Commissioners. She
aid that the dogs Of the foreign repre-
sentatives were not subject 70 the order.
which she style~ a colossal shame
Mr.. Hill. OF the naval Observatory. OBJ
jected 10 this. he claimed that the order
emanated from the Agricultural Depart
ment.
Mrs. Ayery, of Massachusetts,. moved that
a petition be inserted ia The Times re-
questiHg the Commissioners to put out Of
force the obnoxious order. this petition, 20
be signed by every individual dog owner
60 14r IA
This motion was carried.
Dennis O'Connor drew up the following
petition which was -dopted.
we, the undersigned citizens Of the
District OF Columbia, most respectfully
petition the Honorable COmmissiO toner's Of
the District Of Columbia to rescind the in
human and cruel order recently promuI-
gated compelling the muzzling OF all
dogs"
The meeting adjourned 70 reconyene at
the call Of the chair.
The District Commissioners sent yes
terdsy the following letter TO Joseph s
Moss. an euploye Of the White House who
recently made complaint to the Commis-
sioners regarding the capture Of his dog
by the Poundmaster.
In reply 10 your letter Of March 10
protesting against the capture Of your dog
found unmuzzled in the street snd request
ing that under the circumstances the
amount paid by you % redeem the animal
from the pound, the Commissioners will
state FOR your information that the infa-
nous law Of which YOU complain is an act
Of Congress which the Commissioners feel
compelled 10 enforce on account OF the eN-
istence OF hydrOphobia in the District as
certified TO by the Secretary OF Agriculture.
The Commissioners would also state
that where dogs have been found with a
muZzle attached to them. although not in
the proper position but eydencing a will
ingness on the part of the owner to comply
with the law the POundmaster has been in
stTUcted TO return the dogs 10 the owners
il possible. or al least not deal with the
cases as II the dogs had no muzzle at
tsched.
In the case OF the dog that you own il
was evident that you were entirely willing
TO comply with the law ard bought a muZ-
zle for that purpose but the Commission
ers cannot be responsible for the fact that