S.P.C.A.

Press, Volume LXXXVIII, Issue 26857, 9 October 1952, Page 5

S.P.C.A.

Sir, —In reply to Mr H. P. Bridge, I wish to state that the statements in his letter are not correct. Mr Bridge knows that I made the statement, as he discussed it with the secretary of the society. It is also incorrect to say that “the subject matter has never been discussed with the society’s council,” as a resolution, was passed that the policy shall be no destruction of animals unless for sickness, accident, or at the owner’s request. We who voted for this policy are continually in dread of the personnel of the council changing, and with it, the policy. My women’s committee raises hundreds of pounds each year to enable the Animals’ Home to keep going. We pay for the advertisements and have just subsidised the new ambulance by £250. I will always strenuously fight for the welfare of our animals and a “no killer” policy. —Yours, etc., MRS E. CRAIG, Member of Executive Council. Member of Council, chairman of Women’s Committee. October 6, 1952.

Sir, —“Sympathiser” has expressed the woman’s privilege of changing the subject. Her (I take it she is of the weaker sex) new complaint that dogs, and bitches are kept in the same runs in the home, thereby aggravating the stray problem, shows an inadequate knowledge of animal management in general and of the home in particular. Had she, when visiting the home, asked the few intelligent questions, I suggest she would have been told that there are only two periods in the year when it is necessary to segregate the sexes and that this is always attended to by the staff, special runs being provided for the purpose. She would probably have been told also that the animals settle down better, that there is less fretting and less fighting when dogs and bitches are run together. In answer to the last question, my answer is “No, but who does it?”—Yours, etc., H. THOMPSON. October 6, 1952.