Modem Cynolatry. 
761 
1880.] 
doo’-keeping ? Might not those who cry out for “ retrench- 
ment and reform ” find here an appropriate point upon which 
to fix their attention ? 
It is small consolation to learn that there is, at any rate, one 
country which exceeds us in this phase of waste. America 
has been congratulated on the fadt that she has not to main- 
tain a “ vast standing army.” But in place thereof she 
cherishes dogs to the estimated number of eleven millions, 
and, if our former suppositions are correct, pays for them the 
enormous sum of 22 millions sterling annually. Let those 
who doubt whether dogs are proper subjects for taxation 
remember that but for the dog-tax we should no doubt be 
similarly over-run. 
When the advocates of the dog find themselves encoun- 
tered by the irresistible logic of fadts, as far as the danger to 
mankind and the economical worthlessness of their clients 
are concerned, they have recoure to some most curious argu- 
ments. In the first place comes the “ poor man ” plea. 
“ Ouida ” saith : — “ Let not the poor man be made to think 
that a dog is a luxury of the affedtions (!) only possible 
for the rich \ let not the poor man be taught to see that 
to have a pet for his children is a greater crime and one 
more heavily punished than wife-beating or bestial drunken- 
ness.” 
It is remarkable how the poor man is “trotted out ” when- 
ever a nuisance is to be upheld or a folly defended. When 
intra-mural interment was first attacked we were told that it 
would be cruel to rob the “ poor man ” of his “ nook in the 
parish churchyard.” The drift of Mr. Hopwood’s bill, above 
referred to, was that the “ poor man ” as well as the 
rich might enjoy the occasional luxury of committing a wan- 
ton assault without having to go to prison* 
Again, “ Ouida” asserts that “nothing is surer to humanise 
the heart hardened by toil and privation than the innocent 
affedtion of a dumb animal.” In the like vein, when it was 
last year proposed to extend the dog-tax to Ireland, a ceitain 
“ honourable ” member— Mr. Biggar, if my memory does 
not fail me— was very eloquent on the humanising influence 
of the dog, and when reminded of Bill Sykes and his bull- 
dog he waxed exceedingly indignant. Yet the Bill Sykes of 
fidtion is but a poor shadow when compared with the Peace 
of faa,— robber, assassin, and dog-fancier. Let those who 
* The admitted injustice of the present law would have been remedied by 
the total abolition of fines and the infli&ion of hard labour in every case of 
wanton assault. 
