“THE MURDER OF DOGS”

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22114, 18 November 1933, Page 9

“THE MURDER OF DOGS”

TO THE EDITOR. Slß,—May I encroach on your space to answer Mr W. H. Batchelor, who writes this morning on the subject of the poisoning of dogs? I cannot conceive anyone with an ounce of feeling poisoning dumb animals. They cannot tell you where their pain is to enable one to try and alleviate it foi them, and Mr Batchelor seems to take a delight in saying that he “ would not mind watching the dog that did this act ” (worrya number of lambs) “die the most horrible death possible.” If Mr Batchelor ■were to get a taste of his own medicine before he leaves this life, then and then only would he know the pangs of poisoning. goes on to say a “ life for a life! ” This I always believed to be applicable to human life only. Where a man has committed murder, he must atone for it by losing his own life. I never thought that this also applied to dumb animals. , One must necessarily feel very sorry for the fatmer who loses a number of lambs, but one wrong never did make such "a course of action as Mr Batchelor would adopt to remedy that wrong. I think the only thing left was to find the owner (if any) of the dog, and I should say that this would he, very difficult, as undoubtedly the owner had turned the dog out to

forage for itself, and would not accept any responsibility for the damage done by it. The owner should, however, be held to blame for not having had the dog destroyed in an appropriate manner instead of driving it out to fend for itself; and I think it is most unsportsmanlike on the part of Mr Batchelor to say that it should be killed in stages, “an hour for each lamb that has been lost.” —I am, etc., E. B. Dunedin, November 17.