CRUELTY TO ANIMALS.

Waikato Times, Volume 98, Issue 16096, 20 September 1924, Page 11 (Supplement)

CRUELTY TO ANIMALS.

ATTITUDE OF THE BULLY^ (By Marama.) The Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals has just celebrated its centenary, and the high respect and the general consideration which has been shown is in marked contrast with the circumstances attending the birth of the Society. When it was first inaugurated it met- with little sympathy and much derision. The idea that any consideration was due to the 'dumb animals was quite new, and was by no means well received. Cockfights were then a common form of lamusement, and also the baiting of bears, and of bulls, and these sports, if they could be called such, were not confined to the rougher classes, but were participated in by the Toms and Jerrys of the period. Members of the House of Commons derided'the new Society. There was a prevalent idea that cruelty and brutality were in some way associated with courage and endurance, and the country had but recently come through the Napoleonic wars, when the demand for these qualities was great. The Society only began to flourish when the patronage of Royalty had made it fashionable, and it had an arduous task in educating public <"\ opinion. The Earl of Shaftesbury, If among his many good deeds, established an annual prize for the best kept cpstermonger's donkey, and that unhappy section of the brute creation profited much by his action. Royalty and aristocracy may be responsible for a, certain amount of sycophancy, and It Is pleasant to relate instances where this has worked for good. Man's Inhumanity to Man. ft is sad to reflect that for almost all the period. the world has existed of which we have any knowledge, cruelty has been the rule and kindness the exception. In classic times men recognised a duty to friends or fellowcitizen's, but none to humanity as such. Slavery was the rule, and has been defended as at least an improvement on the slaughter of captives of war. When men treated other men with an entire absence of consideration, it was of course useless to expect them to think of dumb animals. The gladiatorial games and the combats with wild beasts were carnivals of cruelty, and the effect upon a population with whom these were the chosen spectacles must have been pernicious in the extreme. Christianity was the first influence which tended towards better things, and it's effect was less than might have been expected.. It did not denounce slavery, which only disappeared as the result of economic tendencies. Slave labour could'not compete with free labour. Many slaves were given freedom, and probably this was due to Christian .Ideas, but,it was'nolr part of the direct leaching. Neither was consideration for dumb animals taught as a religious duty. It is on record that George . Pox, the founder of -, Quakerism, reproved emphatically a man who cheated his hbrse- of his oats, but then Pepys, the diarist, speaks of disgust for bull baiting, and he could not by any stretch of imagination be accounted pious. The basis of kindness to man or to animals is, however, the great Christian precept to do unto others as you would they should do .to you, and the working of this idea Jdid in the fulness of time lead to thought for dumb animals.' I Love Little Pussy, Her Coat Is so Warm. •The primary instinct of mankind is to cruelty, and this is shown by the common attitude of boys. As they grow older they become ashamed of the methods, but in many instances show that there is no great change of mind. One of the common sights of everyday is to see a horse,struggling with a heavy load and doing its utmost, while the driver encourages i*, with a whip. This is sheer lack of imagination, and is on a par with parents who. art} equally indignant with a child for telling lies, or for asking them questions when they are tired. It is, however, possible to overdo the question of kindness to animals, and grow more sentimental over a pet dog than over a baby. This is, of course, making a virtue ridiculous. There are, however, many cases where there is room for a difference of opinion. A warm debate has been conducted in Home papers on the ethics of fly-fish-ing and the question whether the fish fuffers, and if so whether his sufferings bear any proportion to the pleasure of the fisherman in his sport, has been keenly argued. To kill for food is admittedly legitimate, and when the fisherman has caught his fish it is commonly eaten, so that there seems small grounds for ruling out this sport. What, however, are we to say to shooting or to fox homing, or the coursing of hares? it is going too far to demand that all such sports shall cease; but we can at least rule any in which the quarry has not a #fyfr chance of escape. The shooting of pigeons from a trap is a vile business, and battue shooting of pheasants seems little better.

The Wembley Rodeo. At the Exhibition now being held in London a detachment of Australian rough-riders took home horses and wild cattle to exhibit buck-jumping, and the capture of cattle by their horns. After their performance was exhibited there was an insistent demand that it be stopped. To ride a bucking unbroken horse is a fine feat of horsemanship, but no animal can be expected to buck at morning and evening performances for some weeks, without an undue amount of spurring'. The feat which is wholly admirable on the Australian sheep run becomes entirely objectionable when it is turned Into a show. There is plentv of room still for the activities of "the society, and it is not only individual tI 5 " °J Cn3elty tnaf ' ca!l fnr reproof, more has be Pn much protest lately at rum«i?ilf oriminate daughter of the KS h g numb "* of Wild beasts. we r£ m ? e i VeS s P° but when science has put in their hands we m» fee .Inclined to question the* title Kindness to animals is due not nni* "n their account bu nn « y Monkeys are not thl ««i ,r mvntlons, for man; 1 otSer LK ,a - some distant \-i nrt S ma,S T K is. too, the reflection that „„«, so lowering to the "charact T£*<£ nrac Ice of cruelty to those who r n nyyfn any way retaliate. The bu ,"C .fun(versa!!y loathed, vet 100 1? us adopt the attitude *«, h ° e ° £ , , , our dealings with the dumb creation.