124 Missouri Agricultural Report. 



In some parts of my own county there has been some dissatis- 

 faction. One farmer, who has long been a successful sheep raiser 

 and who has secured a large tract of valuable land from his suc- 

 cess and had never had the misfortune of having dogs get into his 

 flocks, said some mean things about me and the dog law. I saw 

 him a short time ago and he said, "I was opposed to your dog law 

 but have just had $25.00 worth of sheep killed and, if your dog 

 law was in force, I could get my money back. I am ready to sign 

 a petition for the dog law, for now I see where you are right. There 

 is no income whatever from the dogs; from my sheep is where I 

 get clothing for my family and money to buy land." He also said, 

 "I know a number of men who own farms and who always keep a 

 gang of dogs. They never owned a sheep in their lives and do not 

 know their value, but they do know how to love a dog." 



I find a majority in the House and Senate are willing to vote, 

 personally, for a dog law, but are afraid of their job. Now, what 

 we have to do is to go to work and keep this sentiment growing. 

 We have done a great work in a short space of time. The stock 

 law that we now have in most every county in the State was not 

 carried in the county in whhich I live for a number of trials, but we 

 at last succeeded. The votes for very few of the fine court houses 

 that are in many counties in our State were not carried on the first 

 trial, some not even on second or third, but when the people were 

 convinced that was the right thing to do, the votes counted. Now 

 we have only got this enterprise started. We did not get a whole 

 loaf, but a slice, and we must keep the ball rolling till we get a 

 whole loaf. I was satisfied the validity of the bill would be ques- 

 tioned, and it has been by one judge, but he is only one man and 

 not final. I have had the matter examined from one end to the 

 other by competent lawyers, and there was but one point of ques- 

 tion in it, and I am confident that point would be sustained by the 

 Supreme Court on a point of justice and equity, governed by po- 

 lice regulations. The law does not call for a tax but a license. 



A man has to pay a license to have the privilege to keep a 

 dog. Nearly every city and town in the State has a dog license — 

 if they pay it there, why not have it in the county and make it 

 general ? 



FEWER DOGS — MORE BREAD AND BUTTER. 



It will not be a hardship on the poor — if they would keep less 

 dogs they would have more for their families to eat. It is the dogs 

 that are kept and not fed that cause us so much trouble. They 





