Deo. 28, 1895. 



FOREST AND STREAM. 



668 



and such acceptance may be withdrawn by a two-thirds vote by ballot 

 at any meeting ot the Association or its executive committee. 



Art. VII.— Sec. 3 amended to read "Finance" instead of "Ad- 

 visory." - — 



Art. VIII. amended by adding (after "election") "by ballot at the 

 next meeting of the executive or advisory committee." 



Art. XII.— Sec. 1 to read: An advisory committee of eight, consist- 

 ing of the president and vice-president of the Association, the presi- 

 dent ot the associate members and the chairman of each of the 

 standing committes, as provided for in Article XIII. Sec. 4. At all 

 meetings of this committee four members shall constitute a quorum. . 



Art. XIII.— There shall be elected at each annual meeting the fol- 

 lowing standing committees, the members of which shall serve until 

 their successors are elected. 



I. A stud book committee, composed of three members, which shall 

 have the business management of the stud book, investigate all 

 charges submitted to it, and shall render an account of its proceed- 

 ings to the executive committee at each meeting. 



II. A finance committee, composed of three members, to which all 

 bills must be referred for approval, and which must audit and certify 

 to the accounts of the secretary-treasurer in January of each year. 



III. A constitution and rules committee, composed of five members, 

 one of which shall be the secretary-treasurer of the Association, to 

 which must be referred all proposed amendments to the constitution 

 or rules. This committee must report to tbe Association its recom- 

 mendations upon all amendments offered before they can be acted 

 upon. It can also suggest such amendments as it considers advis- 

 able. 



IV. A field trial and coursing committee, composed of delegates 

 representing; field trials and coursing clubs, to which all matters per- 

 taining to field trials or coursing must be referred. 



V. A membership committee, composed of three members, one of 

 which shall be a secretary-treasurer of the Association ; it shall have 

 the power to report its recommendations upon all applications for 

 membership. Sec. 2. At the annual meeting of the Association the 

 delegates shall elect first the chairman, to be followed by the remain- 

 ing members of each standing committee. No delegate can be elected 

 as chairman of more than one committee. 



Section 1 of Dog Show Rule 15 was amended to read: "One of which 

 shall have been at a show offering not less than 81,000 in cash prizes. 

 This qualification does not apply to shows held west of 95° of west 

 longitude." 



The Rule V. of Regulations Governing Clubs to read: "No show held 

 under American Kennel Club rules at which the prize money is less 

 than $500 can provide any challenge classes; this rule does not apply 

 to shows held west of 95° of west longitude." 



A proposed amendment empowering the advisory committee to 

 license clubs to give shows under A. 1C. C. rules was tabled. 



The committee on rules also submitted this proposed amendment: 

 "No dog whelped after January 1, 1896, can be a competitor for any 

 prize offered at a show held under A. K. O. rules that has been 

 cropped." It was warmly abated. 



The additional rule recommended in the report, to wit: 

 "No dog whelped after June 30, 1895, can be a competi- 

 tor for any prize offered at a show held under A. K. C. 

 rules that has been cropped," was read. 



Dr, Foote— I move the adoption of that rule, and in 

 doing so I want to present the argument which gives the 

 idea of the committee. When we suggested the abolish- 

 ment of cropping we supposed that the sense of humanity 

 in our breeders would surmount all other considerations, 

 and that it would receive not only general, but hearty 

 indorsement. We did not suppose that the legal aspect 

 of the question would have to be considered, nor had we 

 imagined the extent to which personal money considera- 

 tion would influence the result. As it is, we find a strong 

 opposition, with absolutely no argument that cannot be 

 met by those who favor the step. 



The most extensive protest comes from the great Dane 

 and bull terrier breeders, but, sifting the matter, it is now 

 or never; for the longer cropping is permitted the stronger 

 will become their reasons for its continuance and the 

 greater would be the hardship should a change be made. 

 In the case of the great Dane it is claimed that their 

 natural ears come too large and spoil their expression. 

 We question if they would look, any worse witb natural 

 ears than they do now with their miserably butchered 

 ears, for a well cropped one is a rare exception, and we 

 believe it would have been impossible to breed a good ap- 

 pearing ear on these dogs. The breeders claim that the 

 cropping will be continued in Germany, and that they 

 will not be able to get good uncropped ones. This state- 

 ment is not well founded. When the Germans find that 

 we want uncropped Danes they will be only too glad to 

 save the best ears for American and English purchasers. 

 Furthermore, we contend that any breed that cannot live 

 without mutilation is not worth fostering. 



As to bull-terriera, we all know that some of them 

 carry good natural ears. The protest from the Bull-Ter- 

 rier Club is a reduetio ad absurdum. It reads: "If crop- 

 ping be persisted in, nature aided by a judicious cropping 

 will stop reverting to such useless and unsightly appen- 

 dages as most bull-terriers' ears naturally are." If we 

 continue to countenance cropping the English breeders 

 will be most pleased to crop their worst-eared specimens 

 and send them to us, keeping their good ears to improve 

 their breed, while we will be worse handicapped than 

 ever to obtain good ears. In black and tan and white 

 English terriers cropping has been their curse, and yet I 

 question to-day if the breeders in this country would have 

 the courage to meet the temporary loss and inconven- 

 ience by supporting the non-cropping amendment. The 

 same argument applies to these breeds as to the bull-ter- 

 riers. Toy and "Yorkshires can be improved in appear- 

 ance with well carried natural ears that could easily be 

 produced. 



The opposition in our kennel club is somewhat aston- 

 ishing. We can understand the vote from the Dane and 

 Bull-Terrier clubs, but the others are suggestive of setting 

 aside principle that no offense may be offered. What 

 other explanation can general clubs, such as the New 

 England Kennel Ciub and the New Jersey Kennel League, 

 give? 



The Boston Terrier Club takes the most remarkable 

 step in directing its delegate to oppose the amendment. 

 Its scale of points as published in their constitution not- 

 only in no way recognizes cropping, but calls for nat- 

 ural ears, and we fail to see how judges can recognize a 

 cropped specimen. (Read from the Boston Terrier con- 

 stitution.) 



The action of the Spaniel Club can only be explained 

 in their desire to protect shortening of tails, and we are 

 only sorry in forming this amendment that we did not 

 cover all unnecessary mutilation, but the tail cutting is so 

 infinitesimally small as compared with cropping that it 

 never occurred to us as entering into the subject, and the 

 plea that it is justifiable might be reasonably claimed in 

 at least one breed. 



Mr. Higginson, of the Bull-Terrier Club, has been the 

 leading opponent to the amendment so far as his breed is 

 concerned, In one of his letters he says: "I believe that 

 I am a law-abiding citizen; I believe that ninety-nine out 

 of every hundred bull-terrier men are the same, and when 

 it is laid down that cropping ears is cruel in the eyes of 

 the law I am going to give up the practice; but I want 

 the law of the country to say this, not the whims of a lot 

 of pug, bulldog or mastiff men, very worthy men, but not 

 hull-terrier men, and I want bull-terrier men to have a say 

 about prohibiting cropping bull-terriers." 



k In the Penal Code of this State we find Section 655, on 

 page 208, together with Section 15, on page 4. We are 

 assured by Mr. Haines, the president of the Society for 

 tbe Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, that this law is 

 general throughout the United States; so after all Mr. 

 Higginson and ninety-nine out of every one hundred bull- 

 terrier men, with all that they have written against the 

 amendment, must be with us, and no doubt had the law 

 been better understood there would have been less opposi- 

 tion at this meeting. 



The E. K. C. would have taken their action in opposi- 

 tion to cropping long before they did, had they appreciated 

 its illegality. A conviction under the law was enough, and 

 like law-abiding citizens they gracefully bowed to the 

 situation. You can have no doubt but that the law we 

 have read to you fully covers the question. Can we 

 afford to ignore it and give our indorsement to an illegal 

 act? Is it necessary for us to await a conviction? and 

 would such conviction influence the present opposition? 

 Croppers may say what they please about the little suffer- 

 ing incurred by the operation, but those of us who have 

 seen it in all its phases and in all breeds in which it is prac- 

 ticed know better, and your committee can not under- 

 stand how one who loves a dog — and the dog alone — can 

 sanction the continuance of this practice. 



Mr. Wood (representing Great Dane Club)— It seems 

 to me that the legal aspect which Dr. Foote objects to has 

 been first called in by himself. I know of no case in which 

 it has been brought in except by the ponderous brief and 

 by reference to the penal code he has made here to-day. I 

 shall only speak of the matter so far as it relates to the 



Here the case is entirely different. Dr. Foote has read 

 you the section of the penal code which applies if any 

 does. It is the only section of the penal code upon this 

 subject, and nowhere else except in this section does it 

 touch the question of cropping either directly or indirectly. 

 I have made diligent search and I have also made inquiries 

 at the office of Horace Russell, the counsel of the Society 

 for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, and I have yet 

 to learn of any instance where a jury of this State has 

 declared that cropping a dog's ears was unjustifiable 

 injury, maiming or mutilation of an animal. . i 



The position in this country is radically different from 

 what it is in England. In England they adopt the 

 straightforward course. They obtain their conviction 

 and then the action of the English Kennel Club followed. 

 In this country they are trying to get the American Ken- 

 nel Club by its action here to express its opinion that 

 cropping is cruel. Then when the next trial under this 

 section comes up the action of the American Kennel Club 

 may be used in enabling them to obtain what they have 

 not been able to do, that is, obtain a conviction. I think 

 that the American Kennel Club has sufficient to do with- 

 out aiding anyone in pulling out chestnuts from the fire. 



Then Mr. Wood read a letter written by Dr. Phillips, 

 the surgeon at the hospital at Hornellsville, surgeon of the 

 Erie Railroad, and special agent of the Society for the 

 Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, as follows: 



In reply to your question, "Do I consider the cropping of dogs 1 ears 

 a cruel proceeding?" I would say that, in my opinion, if the cropping 

 is properly done under an anaesthetic and dressed properly, it is not 

 cruel, as it occasions no pain; but if done without an anaesthetic, with 



ME. C. A. RATHBONE'S TOLEDO QUEEN. 

 From a painting by Edw. H. Osthaus. 



Great Dane Club, of which I am a delegate. I have heard 

 in opposition three arguments: one that the practice is 

 cruel; the second that cropping is prohibited in England; 

 the third that it is a showing of the dog in a mutilated 

 condition. The great Dane dog is not one which has 

 been in this country for many years, He is compara- 

 tively new to this country. We have not the best speci- 

 mens here in this country. You all know the quickest 

 way to improve a breed of dogs is by judicious importa- 

 tion — such dogs as are imported either from England or 

 from Germany. In Germany the dog has been cropped 

 from time immemorial, and he will be cropped in spite 

 of and without regard to any action taken by this club. 

 Now, if the great Dane breeder wishes to import dogs he 

 either has to import an immature specimen or one which 

 is cropped; he will not import for the improvement of the 

 breed an immature specimen; therefore he has to import 

 one cropped. If he imports one cropped he cannot win 

 prizes with him in this country. He cannot make that 

 dog known to other breeders in thiB country by showing 

 him at bench shows. 



Another matter which plays an important part with 

 great Danes is that a large number of great Dane dogs in 

 this country are owned by Germans. They have been in 

 the habit for years of seeing a certain type of dog, a cer- 

 tain type of head and a certain form of head, which can 

 only be obtained by cropping the ears of the dog, and an 

 expression that the dog will never have if his ears are al- 

 lowed to hang down. A great many Germans have told 

 me that if they could not continue to keep their dogs with 

 cropped ears and show them in competition in that form 

 they did not care to keep the dog at all. This is not a 

 matter of sentiment; it is a matter of actual tangibility. 

 The action of this club has already had a vast effect upon 

 the Great Dane Club. Mr. George W. Schenck wrote a 

 letter to the Great Dane Club which has been published, 

 which in substance was that he had thirteen doga in his 

 kennel; that he was endeavoring to import a dog, but that 

 he would not do so until this question was settled. I have 

 since received a letter from Mr. Sshenck, and although 

 he is a large breeder and seems to be very faint hearted, 

 as some one seems to have told him fairy stories, he says 

 that thinking it was reasonably sure that this amendment 

 was passed, he has already sold his kennel and dogs. 

 I think that disposes of any validity of the argu- 

 ment that the English Kennel Club is also prohibiting 

 cropping ao far as the great Dane is concerned. So far 

 as the question of cruelty is concerned, as I understand 

 it the legislation which was taken by the English Kennel 

 Club was taken under these facts: It is a misdemeanor 

 under the English law to crop the ears of a dog, and in 

 England they obtained a conviction for the cropping of a 

 dog's ears, and after that conviction was obtained the 

 English Kennel Club took cognizance. The effect of that 

 rule was that they simply stood by the law of England. 



a dull pair of shears, or, as is very often the case, a cbisel and a block, 

 it is decidedly cruel, and should be prevented in all cases. 



A case came to my attention the other day, as agent of the Ameri 

 can Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, when a cropping 

 was attempted with a carpenter's chisel and hammer. I appeared 

 upon the scene just in time to prevent the mutilation, and showed 

 how it should be done humanely. I gave the dog antesthetics, cropped 

 the ears with a sharp pair of shears, and brought the cut surfaces of 

 the skin together with a continuous catgut suture. I dressed the ears 

 with iodoform gauze and cotton, and got union by first intention. 

 This method diminishes the amount of partissure at the cropped Bur- 

 face and leaves the edge of the ears covered with hair, which prevents 

 flies from biting the bare surface, which greatly annoys the dog in the 

 summer. 



I need hardly say to you, an experienced dog fancier, that it Is 

 dangerous to give your anaesthetics carelessly. You should always 

 have an experienced man to give the ar aesthetics, and I think you w'ill 

 find the "A. C. E." mixture safer than chloroform, and very little is 

 required to place the dog entirely oblivious to his surroundings. 



I do not think that the question of the difficulties which 

 we would encounter in breeding the great Dane with un- 

 cropped ears need be touched upon. I think that every- 

 body will admit that it is an impossible thing to do for at 

 least a great, many years. So far as the question of 

 humanity is concerned, the great Dane breeders are as 

 humane as the breeders of any other dog. The dogs' tails 

 are never cut and none of the other practices which are 

 sometimes spoken of as cruel are permitted. Before this 

 question ever came up and before the American Kennel 

 Club took any steps, action was taken upon this subject 

 by the Great Dane Club. It was suggested that the Great 

 Dane Club modify its type so that the dogs could not be 

 shown with cropped ears. The question was argued and 

 discussed at great length, and it was considered that the 

 action was inadvisable at that time. 



It seems to me that this whole question is one that ap- 

 plies to certain breeds of dogs, and it seems to me that the 

 action which the American Kennel Club should take on 

 this subject is to leave the type of dog to the specialty 

 clubs which have charge of that breed of dog, bringing 

 forward their interests and promoting that breed. It 

 seems to me that it might be possible for the American 

 Kennel Club to say that no dog should be shown with his 

 hair cut. It is within their scope and power. They can 

 do it if they want to, just the same as they can pass this 

 resolution, but that is a question of type just as much as 

 the cutting of dogs' ears is a question of type, and I think 

 the American Kennel Club will act wisely in leaving it to 

 the specialty clubs to deal with the type of dogs which 

 they represent especially. 



Mr. Webster made a telling speech in reply to Mr. 

 Wood. He divided Mr. Wood's arguments under two 

 heads: first, that cropping would be a pecuniary loss. 

 Mr. Webster considered the letter, read by Mr. Wood, a. 

 splendid argument against cropping, and that it supported 

 the claim that cropping is a brutal custom, followed 

 by men of inexperience, and who, as a rule, have 

 no fine instincts whatever. He touched on the 

 use of anaesthetics and dressings, and held that 



