Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1929-10-18
Wants Teeth i'm Law
To Gag Barking Dog

To the Editor Of The Star:
was much interested In the article
by Mr.. Henry, in the magazine supple
ment of last Sundays Star, on the
noises of city life and certain efforts be-
ing made to abate them. Mr.. Henry
made a fairly comprehensive catalogue
of city noises, but failed TO include the
very worst and most common of them
all-the widespread, almost continuous,
barking of dogs.
The almost universal keeping Of these
pets under the restraints necessary In a
crowded city is first, most unfair to the
dog, and, then, a growing menace to the
peace and good order of the community.
Within 200 feet from where now sit
three large collie dogs, one police dog, q
puppy and Spitz are kept in con-
finement that ought to arouse the good
Offices Of the Humane Society. One OF
these dogs is kept for the most part on
a second-story back porch, by 25 feet.
OF course, he barks much of the time,
all his other activities being restrained.
The others are in confinement little bet
ter. All are lively aniInals--that Is.
they would be If they could, but are sub
jected by unfeeling masters TO bore
dom that would make the angels weep.
1t is not easy to deal with the nui-
sance of barking dogs under present laws.
Complaint to the police department re-
suits in nothing more than a call upon
the owenr of the dog with the
information that complaint has
been made. The police say they
can go no further. 1t then be-
comes necessary for at least two, pref
erably more, neighbors to unite in q
written complaint to the police, when a
warrant will be sworn out against the
dogs owner, who is charged with main
tanning and abetting nuisance. The
case then drags through Police Court,
witnesses are obliged to appear several
times in court before the case comes to
trial, and If the nuisance Is to be stopped
at all, the evidence must be of q kind
cumulative, rock-bound and steel-ribbcd
to satisfy the court. In the majority of
the cases that have come under my OBJ
servation the charges have been dis
missed, the dog goes on barking and the
citizen whose nerves may be racked
through troubled days and sleepleSs
nights has no recourse in law against
this most obvious and fragrant source
of disorder.
Under existing conditions in our city,
1t is fact that, in law and practice,
the dog Is Of more account than hu-
man being.
And this barking of dogs Is all so
needless. Any dog can be taught in
four days to stop barking at every cat 1t
sees, at the children playing, and at
every one who goes through the alley.
Men and women who keep dogs in our
city restrain every other natural activ-
ity of the dog to a point that makes it
actual abuse of the animal and seem to
act on the principle that If he is allowed
to bark, animal slavery Is compensated.
What is needed to put an end to this
intolerable nuisance Is a simple police
regulation making the owner of bark
ing dog responsible therefor. He should
be subject to arrest and fine when the
disorder of the dog is made the basis of
reasonable testimony against him. The
regulation should be made facile enough
to be enforced by the police without
court action as formidable as appeal to
the United States Supreme Court
With apologies to Mr.. Henry, no sci
entific methods are required to deal
with this nuisance-just plain common
sense and a regulation in the police
manual with few teeth In It, that will
bring dog owners to exact responsibility
for the action of their dogs.
j. G. RANSOM.