212 



Sheep Worrying. 



to him by various County Councils, more particularly in Scotland, on the subject of 

 the worrying of sheep by dogs. 



There can be no doubt that the damage and loss sustained in this way by 

 agriculturists is in many districts very considerable, but it is not an easy matter to 

 devise remedies which would be practical and efficient. 



The suggestions which have been most frequently made on the subject are that 

 County Councils should be empowered to require that dogs should wear collars 

 inscribed with the name and address of their owners, that better provision should be 

 made for the seizure of stray dogs, that the County Councils should also be 

 empowered to make bye-laws for preventing dogs from straying between sunset and 

 sunrise, and that the consent of a Petty Sessional Court, or — in Scotland — of the 

 Sheriff, should be necessary as a condition precedent to the issue of a Certificate of 

 Exemption from Licence Duty. 



Proposals for legislation on the subject were embodied in the Dogs Regulation 

 Bill introduced into the House of Commons by Mr. Long, when President of the 

 Board, in 1900, and Mr. Hanbury had hoped to deal with the matter during the 

 present Session of Parliament. There is now no possibility that this will be the case, 

 but he thinks that it is desirable that he should direct the attention of County Councils 

 to existing powers for the enforcement of the Dog Licence Duties, and the seizure of 

 stray dogs. 



Under Section 23 of the Customs and Inland Revenue Act, 1878, the police may 

 ■sue for and recover penalties for the keeping of dogs without a licence, and the Court 

 has power to award costs ; and one half of the penalty in England and Wales is 

 payable for the benefit of the Superannuation Fund of the police force to which the 

 police constable who instituted the prosecution belonged, and in Scotland to the 

 treasurer of the police assessment of the county or burgh to the police force of which 

 :such police constable belonged. 



Under Article 10 of the Rabies Order of 1897, Local Authorities are required, 

 rrespective of any question of the freedom of their district from rabies, to cause all 

 stray dogs found within their district to be seized and dealt with as therein provided. 

 This Order is one which may with considerable advantage be enforced by the police 

 acting in co-operation with the Local Authority. 



Mr. Hanbury believes that if arrangements could be made for the exercise of 

 these powers and duties by the police with vigilance and efficiency, the evils of which 

 agriculturists complain might be materially reduced, and he therefore desires me to 

 ask you to bring the matter under the notice of your Council with a view to their 

 considering whether further action might not be taken with advantage in the directions 

 indicated. 



I enclose additional copies of this Circular for distribution to the members of 

 your Council, and also of the Circular A™ issued by the Board on the subject in 

 January, 1899, to which they desire to give further publicity at the present time. 



I am, etc. , 



T. H. Elliott, 



Secretary. 



Circular A^ 1 was issued to Local Authorities under the 

 Diseases of Animals Acts, 1894 and 1896, other than those 

 wholly within the Metropolitan Police District, and was as 

 follows : — 



Sir, 7th January, 1899. 



I am directed by the Board of Agriculture to inform you that they are 

 desirous of drawing the attention of your Local Authority to the Recommendations 

 made by the Departmental Committee appointed in April, 1896, to inquire into and 



