THE DOG ORDINANCE.

Southland Times, Volume VII, Issue 539, 13 August 1866, Page 2

THE DOG ORDINANCE.

Sic,— The new dog law in Southland appears so ineffective in its operations, that I trust you will excuse the liberty I take in addressing you on the subject, and point out a few of its defects. I purchase to-day the necessary numbered plate, which the Inspector tells me is his receipt for the 10s. I have paid him, and haying got it properly fastened to a new collar, secure it as well as I can on my dog's neck, which, despite my best endeavors, is removed easily with a file in a few moments. Now mark you, this is a receipt for 10s, and worth 10s to anyone else having a dog, or feeling disposed to sell it to some one else for any consideration he thinks proper t® accept. Is not this an inducement to theft ? Let me ask, whatman in his sober senses, who had got a receipt for 10a, seeing that it was of the same value to anyone else who thought proper to appropriate it to himself, would have it round his dog's neck for security. Well, the day ends, and I feel satisfied in having satisfied the law, but during the night the dog has the collar taken from him, and as I have an engagement in town in the morning, and my mind's absorbed with other matters, I don't notice the dog's loss, bat musingly passing the police station, a policeman accosting me suddenly with "is that your dog, sir? why he's no collar." I represent my case to him, but all to no use, he's inexorable. " Sorry for you sir, the dog's no collar — must do my duty — you. can get another 10s worth, which if you fail doing, I must destroy him." The person who has got the collar, fastens it on his own dog, easily passes the hasty glance of the police who are not required to carry about with them either a copy or the book of entry of the Inspector, and see that the number corres-

ponds with, the description of dog there entered, but simply observing that the dog has got .1 collar, satisfy themselves that they have done their duty. Again", a person a few miles from town has three or four "dogs, but for appearance he registers one. "When he conies to town he fastens the collar on the dog he brings with him, or being of an accommodating nature should a neighbor require a collar for a day or so, he lends it to him. The amount 10s is also objectionable, as offering an inducement to lawlessness, seeing that the owner of a dog so disposed, would not hesitate to repay himself with the first stray sheep that offered the chance. In 1858-59, and '60, the registration fee m Australia was Is for twelve months. Why should it be more here? I don't begrudge the Government, and willingly pay for good G-overn-meut and sound laws, and feel satisfied if their outlay is again beneficially distributed, but when we see the laws indifferently framed, it most certainly behoves us to remedy those defects as soon as we cat». Would not, think you, a published list of persons who have paid the tax, their addresses, names, and descriptions of dogs open to general inspection, be more satisfactory, and tend more to expose defaulters. This payment to be final. Anyone living in a neighborhood infested with dogs, or at all annoyed with them, and having access to one of these lists, would be in a position to supply the police with information that would speedily through their agency, be remedied. I am Sir, yours' Scbutesy. Invercargill, Bth August.