ABOUT THOSE DOGS.

Manawatu Herald, Volume II, Issue 16, 17 October 1879, Page 2

ABOUT THOSE DOGS.

TO THE EDITOR OP THE MAXAWATU HEEALD. Sir — The County Council have de» cided to take some energetic action in the matter of the dog nuisance, because a few of Sir William Fox's and Mr Halcombe's sheep have been destroyed ; and now any dog (valuable or otherwise) found in the streets without its registered number affixed to a collar, is liable to bo seized in an unsuspectiug moment and have its life taken. Now, Sir, with all due deference to those fci-eat rnnholders and Connty Councillors — Messrs Halcombe and Kebbell — I, in common with a great many other people, think that the present tax is ample, the only thing necessary to. make it sufficient to keep the number of dog* within bounds being that the tux should be fully collected. Under piesent circumstances, the following is the style: — Some official who has neither the time nor the inclination Jto^Hfe perly carry out the dutits, is appointSß a Dog Tax Collector, and he, in his turn, appoints a Deputy Tax Collector, who perhaps lesides at some centre of population, and probably knows the. greater number of the people in the township who keep dogs. Having made out a list of the names (perhaps with the help of a friend) be visits the owners, and realises about £2 or £3 commission for his day's work. That finishes the collection proper of the dog tax ; perhaps a few move dogs are

.V - , 'T^^ registered privately at the office during ttfe year by persons with tender cpns&ences. Now, Mr Editor, do you think that is a proper way to recover the tax ? or can it be said that the tax receives a fair trial ? If the tax wero increased to 10s— or even £1 ——I venture to assert that no more dogs wonld be destroyed than at present, unless some more vigorous st6ps than obtains at present weie taken to compel the registration of every dog. The Council should make it worth the while of the person appointed to collect the tax to do it thoroughly. Two months after the time when the fee becomes payable, I would advocate that all dogs unregistered should be seized and taken to- some d9pot, where they might be claimed within a space of say three days, after which period to be destroyed ; due notice of course being given in the papers that a seizure had been made. In Auckland, Wellington, and other parts of the Colony the 5s tax is found sufficient j at the former town a collar on which to place the badge is supplied when a dog is registered. Let me ask how the following case looks from a legal point of view :- - The Council insist on all dogs wearing their badges. My dog is registered. He may be off the chain for a time, when its collar and badge is stolen or lost. Before lam aware that the collar is gone, my dog is destroyed for being unregistered. And supposing the dog is a valuable one, who is going to stand the loss ? Is my dog to be destroyed because its collar falls off, or is stolen ? A great hardship is caused by the Act making shepherds pay a tax for their dogs j and if the tax is increased, it will press very heavily on men who have to keep their three or four dogs. Provision should be made for allowing bona Me sheep and cattle dogs to be exempt from the tax. I am, &c , Fido. Foxton, October 14.