New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1914-12-20
Denies Statement Attrib-
uted to Him That This
Must Be Dogless City.
EXPLAINS STAND ON
THE MUZZLING LAW
Interest in Regulating the Keep
ing of Dogs Lies in Prevent
ing the Spread of Rabies.

must go"
James Gardner Rossmsn who rightly
may be called "the dogs best friend,
says in a letter TO the kennel editor OF
The Tribune:
81 am indeed glad to DE able 20 hand
YOU herewith letter signed by Or.
Goldwater to Dr. Robert ). Mcclellan
secretary Of the Veterinary Association,
dated November so, and letter sent
bv Dr. Goldwater through his secre-
tary to DR.. John A. Mclaughlin v .
on the same subject.
eDr. Goldwater emphatiealiy denies
the unqualified statement attributed 10
him that the dog must go.
Il am also attaching hereto for your
information a copy of the article as
personally edited by Or. Goldwater.
II am indebted TO DR.. John A. Nc
Iaughlin and DR.. RObSrt :. Mckeilar,
secretary Of the Veterinary Medical
Association, for copies OF the CORE
spondence that passed between them
and Dr.. Goldwater. ! also have a letter
from DR.. Goldwster covering the same
matter. / am sure the public, espe-
eiallv dog owners. will be greatly in
terested in having DR.. GOldwater'S
views in an article which has been
edited by him personally, and which is
absolutely official
DR.. GoldwateT's letter 20 Dr. Mac
Kellar follows. in part:
TRYING to Control Rabies.
cit seems just a triAe absurd for
your association 10 spend its time DIS
cussing my attitude on the subject ne
Dog Must Co without knowing what
nv attitude is. | have been subjected
10 all sorts of misrepresentation ms
quotation and utilization by the
newspapers and others since the board
OF Health, some months ago, alarmed
81 the spread o. rabies. adopted the
nuzzline ordinance. ! want 10 DO
everything that ] can 90, officially and
otherwise. 70 stamp out rabies reel
sure that my views on this subject
must coincide with those Of any sclen-
+iRc man who has studied the stu
alton. The muzzlng ordinance eN-
presses not only the views OF the BOARD
Of Health. but my own; but why should
DR.. Mclaughlin or anybody eiese waste
time presenting arguments IN Oppose
zion 10 alleged drastic measures Wnlch
have not been officially proposed, ana
which are not contemplated
con the dog question the population
Of the city seems TO be made up IN
large part Of extremists. l belong
neither to one group nor to the other
do believe. however. that the
strict enforcement for a reasonable
period of the muzzling ordinance en-
acted this year will lessen the NUMBER
Of dog bites, and reduce, II II does nol
eliminate. rabies
The Commissioners position on dogs
ard the muzzling law is more clearly
explained in the following IRON MS
secretary 10 DR.. Mclaughlin:
DIR. John 4. Mclaughlin, Y. S, New
York City.
Dear Sir:
In answer 70 your recent communlca-
ton requesting an acknowledgment or
denial By the Commissioner OF the
authorship OF a special article Wnich
anneared in "The New York American"
on Sunday. November 8, 1914, Commits
sioner Goldwater directs me to INFORM
YOU that this article was not written
by him. To be exact, the clrcum-
stances were that writer OF TINS
paper called at is Office requesting
information available IN connection
with the efforts Of this department 10
secure enforcement Of our regulation
recurring the muzzlinF Of all dogs IN
this city.
In answer 10 this call for informa-
ton the representative of "The Amerl-
cam was furnished with the same
pamphlets which were recently sent
YOU. and was also given the privilege OF
quoting from these pamphlets as com
ing from the Commissioner.
DR.. Goldwater emphatically denies
the unqualified statement attributed TO
him that "the dog must 60" HIS IN
terest in the matter OF regulating the
keeping of dogs in this city is only
with the purpose of removing the dan
ger of rabies, and he considers that the
most effectual means of obtaining the
desired result is, first, by securing the
muzzling of all dogs and, second, by
the removal of all stray dogs from the
streets and other public places. lie
feels that with the cooperation OF dog
owners and others interested IN tins
matter toward securing the enforce
ment Of the departments regulation
the desired results can be obtained
without the elimination OF the dog
from the city. 1t is not his intention
and never has been, 70 insist upon any
more drastic action than 20 insist upon
the enforcement Of the present rules
and regulations.
The Commissioner attention mas
been called to the article 70 which you
refer in "The New York American,
and he has taken the occasion TO edit
il with the purpose Of making his views
clear in the matter. In order that you
NAV not misunderstood his intentions
IN this matter | am sending you copy
of the article as it has been revised by
the Commissioner. After reading the
Z article. together with the other pub
lications recently sent to you, the Com
missioner trusts that you will under
stand his position in the matter. II
there is any further information which
YOU may desire in order TO more tully
acouaint yourself with the Commls-
sioner's views, do not hesitate TO re-
Quest IL. Yours very truly,
+. W. FlShE,
Secretary to the Commissioner.
Reason for Controlling Dogs.
y copv of the article on the city dog
sd the reasons for his control. as ed
q. By DR.. Goldwater, is appended;
aro am aware Of the resolutions that
mos ing passed. the indignation meet
namoaat are being held and the ms
s;on Z benefits that are in contempla-
ord;,a defeat the enforcement OF the
does nee requiring the muzzllng OF
fInsI.h the City of New York. But the
STbe Department will stand firm.
loos h movement for the muzzllng OF
II is in righteous one, and so far as
,n,I power shall be continued
scb;ayod enefcent end has been
csnines tIAs in the case of agitated
th;nL;n1 de barks of hysterical, un-
nice A fe,wners are worse than TIER
"a ;nv;dw persistent and wrong head
no;se hluals can make very LOUD
~ hsnut if there were an actual snow