The Bennington evening banner. (Bennington, Vt.) 19??-1961, 1908-10-31
lie pocklNe o. Horse
Humane Legislation That Has Been
Side Tracked Long Enough.

10 is hign time lnat this state OF
Vermont had a proper statute on the
docking of horses. Efforts have been
made. in former years, to secure spec
ial legislation on this matter. but
hitherto every attempt has been balk-
ed by those who desire to exercise the
privilege of mutilating their animals.
Have they not a right to do as they
please with their own property"
Some members Of the Vermont S. p.
c. A. chartered by the General AS
sembly in November, 1880, desired TO
have law passed prohibiting dock
ing, but other members objected; and
II has been said that the brief exist
ence of that society, whose charter
contain the names OF twenty most
honorable gentlemen, is in part at
least, accounted for by the fact that
certain rich men In the society would
not surrender the right g. to cut of
their horses tails!
Today Vermont is conspicuous
among her neighbor states by the abb
sence of such a statute, says the Bur
| llngton Free Press Maine passed
such a law in 1885, Connecticut in
1895; New Hampshire has such law
the New York assembly passed an an,
Unlocking bill In 1906 by a vote of 81
to II, but the Senate voted u for and
20 against it, and the measure failed
of enactment.
The special statute of Illinois on
docking wGs passed in 1891; that of
/ the District of Columbia in 1892; those
of Colorado and Minnesota in 1899;
those Of Michigan, California, Utah
and Washington in 1901; that Of Iowa
| in 1904; Ohio too. and Nebraska have
use for such prohibition as no one
there ever thinks of trimming a horse
in this barbarous fashion.
1t may be claimed that section $500
of the Public Statutes of Vermont is
plain enough. A person who mutt
lates" or "inflicts unnecessary cruelty
upon an animal shall be imprisoned
not more than one year, or fined not
more than 5000. or both" That
sounds well and seems 10 be severe.
But did anyone ever know of a con
vlction for docking being obtained In
a Vermont court? And does not every
body know that the usual fine in a
Vermont justice court for beating or
tormenting horse is $l00 and
costs?" II there were no costs It is
doubtful If any fine would be paid in
the majority Of cases.
The extreme secrecy with which all
! docking operations are conducted
makes it exceedingly difficult TO get
such testimony as the courts require.
One is not likely to find witness
| who will say that he saw the docking
The actual ownership at the moment
the tail was severed will be all but
impossible TO ascertain. AT ten a. m
on q certain day a span Of handsome
long tailed horses Is driven through
the streets by X. the owner of the
same for a full year; az 3 m. they are
traded 10 Y and by ! p. m. become,
so far as papers 90. the property OF
a., an irresponsible stable boy, per.
haps On the morning following they
are paraded on the main streets OF the
city. tailless with fresh and unmistak
able evidences OF the recent injury
bat once more Ostensibly the property
OF the same man who owned them two
days before. Try to find out who was
legally responsible for the manning
Of the beasts and you come al once
! NHhN AlAf IhEkAlAk ny MulAh NuNf WIZ
passed from hand 10 hand. and there
is opened a prospect OF a perpleXine
and probably resultless lawsuit; for
the owner OF these horses has money
and the truth OF the case will be hard
TO find, even when all the parties con
cerned are put under oath. And tn,
veterinary who did the butchery'
will actually boast of his feat-aftei
he has ceased 10 reside IN the state,
The reasons should be- plain why
any statute against docking. to b,
effective. should be cOuched IN som,
such terms as are found In section z.
OF chapter PIP OF the Massachusetts,
laws. III a horse Is found with itl
tail so cut and with the wound result
ing from such cutting unhealed upon
the premises of any person, or in IN,
charge and custody of any person
such fact shall be prima facie eyidenc,
of the violation OF the provisions o.
this section by the owner OF user o.
such premises or the person having
such charge or custody respectively.
> This Mass chusetts law Is copied al
most verbatim by Connecticut anC
Minnesota. posst ssion or control o
freshly locked horse is made print
facie evidence that the person In pos
session or control locked the horse.
The Colorado statute requires a car,
ful registration OF IN locked horses II
the state. Ninety days are allowed
In which TO obtain from the count!
clerk q proper certificate with des
cription OF color. age. size. etc. and al
ter the ninety days have expired "th'
driving. working. keeping. racing Of
using OF any unregistered dOcke,
horse shall be deemed prima facie ey
idence OF the fact that the party driy
ing such unregistered locked horse
locked the tail OF such horse"
We greatly desire to see both thesD
provisions incorporated In a Vernon
statute. Every locked horse In IN,
state should be registered as alsi
every docked horse brought into thu
state. and every man found with
freshly locked horse In his possess
Ion should be- compelled to show caus,
why he should not ofier the penalt.
FOR this atrocious infringement OF TIT
animals rights. this outrage upon th
humane sentiments OF mankind
those only excepted. who are conccit
ed enough to attempt Improvement
on the handiwork OF the Maker OF hor
SEES and men
The New Hampshire law Of whicl
We understand the bill introduced a
Montpelier Is a close copy. contains
the important provision Of the Massg
1 chusetts statute, respecting prima "a
Gle evidence; and We hope the bill
, may be SO amended as to include ais
the Colorado provisions regarding rel
istratiou. Only In this way can thi
. bad business bee completely controlled
To Retain Friendship
- Al L. --..l-lL-l - L - = -