IS CRUELTY TO ANIMALS NECESSARY ? Some Wellington Justices answer "Yes."

Free Lance, Volume II, Issue 94, 19 April 1902, Page 8

IS CRUELTY TO ANIMALS NECESSARY ? Some Wellington Justices answer "Yes."

IF you have a horse that is physically incapable of diaggmg his his load, and you Hog him up a steep hill until he falls with fear and fatigue, you aie doing no harm ; at least, that is what a trio of Wellington justices ruled last week. «- ♦ * The carter in the employ of Mr Lamberg, who, according to competent witnesses, beat one of his team until it fell down, and who was charged with cruelty, is not to blame. The horse should have been made of sterner stuff". He should have had a steam boiler fitted to himself, and as for falling down — absurd ! Imagine anything falling down because an anxious carter lashed it on the strained tendons of its forelegs with a whip, and on a hill that isn't half as steep as Mount Victoria. Of course he was justified. Messrs. McKerrow, Mainwarmg, and Hildreth, J.s P., said so. * * * Inspector Seed, of the S.P.C.A., informs us that in reply to a question put by him to the employer of the acquitted man, he told him it was unnecessary to Hog the horse, that the horse was a good beast, and that he was capable, with his leader, of getting up Elhcestreet with the load. But in Court the driver said he thought it was necessary to use a whip to get up Ellice-street. And the sapient Justices agreed with him. Perhaps it is, but it doesn't seem exactly reasonable when a horse is putting e\ery pound he is capable of into the collar that he will do still better by ha\mg the tendons of his forelegs incapacitated with a whip. The J.s P., in dismissing the case, show that they agree that the best way of getting a horse to pull is to take all the strength out of his legs. The decision is worthy of a conspicuous place in a comic record of New Zealand " Jai Peeisms " Probably a sore back hidden by the cart saddle assists a horse to haul sand. Maybe, that ungrateful animal fell down purposely to get that sore back. Anyhow, the sore was there. * * * We have before us the report of an almost similar case heard in England. The magistrate called it a " ferocious piece of cruelty," and sent the driver io gaol foi "a month's hard." That man should emigrate to Wellington, where what the English magistrate calls ferocious is deemed necessary. The Ellice-street load couldn't ha^e been a heavy one. It took only four men to tip it. The stupid horse that would fall under a load that four men with difficulty tipped (one man usually performs the feat easily) isn't worth pity, is he ? He didn't get it, anyhow, from the J.s P. Then, again, it will cost you h\e shillings to starve a horse ~>l\ hours in Wellington. Surely the amusement is fairly cheap at the price ? Justice recently decided that it was satisfied a man had done all he could do in expiation of the offence of allowing a horse to live in a paddock with nothing but pine needle" to eat by paying that sum. The English Bench helps the Royal Society for the Pre\ention of Cruelty to Animals. Under the English" Malicious Injuries Act," a man may get fourteen years' imprisonment for cruelty to animals. » * * Last year, at the Hereford Assi/es, a prisoner went to gaol for *,e\ en years for cruelty to cattle, and another gentleman, who evidently found it " necessary " to wound a heifer, is in the first yeai of his ten years sentence at this moment. Whether it is that

Wellington Justices are so ignorant of the capabilities ot animals, or are frightened to dispense justice, isn't \ery clear, but it is quite certain that absurd fhe-shilling fines, and no fines at all, are f?ot having a deterrent effect in cruelty cases.