Full Title Name:  Annual Reports of American Soceity for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals -1889 & 1904

Share |
ASPCA Place of Publication:  New York Publish Year:  1889 Primary Citation:  - 0

The ASPCA Published Annual reports with considerable detail about the years events, particular enforcement actions, and reports about cruelty issues.


For the year 1889 Link to: <www.aspca.org>

For the year 1904

Comments & Summary

The Reports of the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals are provided to give the reader some insight as to animal issues from another era. Reading the material quickly brings home how different were the times and how dominant horse issues were within the city of New York. On the other hand some animal issues, e.g., dog fighting, seem timeless.

The reports also reflect an ethic melting pot of New York City with several references to individuals as Russians or Italians. The recent arrive of an individual to the U.S. was used as a defense to cruelty charges [ 7 ].

While you will hopefully be able to read all of the reports, some of the highlights are provided with hyperlinks for quick access into the material.


1. Address of the President .

* Quaint references to " speechless servants of mankind", the helpless and defenseless dumb creatures.

* Operation of ambulance (number of horses removed in year)

2. Report of the Executive Committee .

* Transition of power from the Bergh era.

* The Honorable William Waldorft Astor was elected to Executory Committee.

3. Treasurer's Report

* The operational cost for the year was $27,000.

4. Superintendent's Report .

* Problem of unfit stables .

* Inadequate shipping crates for chickens.

* Inspection of city operated dog pound .

* Problem of poisoning animals.

* Rabbit baiting --acquittals.

* 24 years of data in summary .

5. Report of cases from the year.

* Striking horse with iron shovel [ 17 ], with black snake whip [ 24 ], with iron rod [ 19 ], with car-hook [ 23 ], with ice-tongs [ 25 ], with two-inch board [ 27 ], with butt end of whip [ 29 ], with an axe [ 31 ].

* Dog fighting [ 18 ],[ 26 ],[ 35 ],[ 36 ]; cock-fighting [ 20 ].

* Biting off the ear of dog [ 21 ] [unusually tough sentence].

* Poisoning dogs [ 22 ].

* Inciting a dog to kill a cat [ 28 ].

* Throwing a cat out a window [ 37 ].

* Drove a horse until it dropped dead [ 32 ].

* Biting off the heads of kittens on a bet [ 38 ], of a duck [ 33 ], of a turkey [ 34 ].


1. Address of the President . He laments how the success of the organization has raised the expectations of others so high that now the ASPCA is criticized for not doing more. For not doing more they are subject to "voluminous and vociferous assaults ".

* Successful projects create enemies: stopping the pigeon shooting .

* The President refers to animal as " dumb creatures ".

* Should the ASPCA sand the streets of New York to protect the horses from slippery conditions ?

* Frivolous complaints.

* The President noted that during the year 1904, 63,285 horses were stopped in the street to be sure they were fit for labor; 173 times every day.

2) The Treasurer's Report. Expenses for the Society for the year amounted to $ 127,000 .

3) The Report of the Superintendent. He suggests that " asphalt " is responsible for more than two thirds of the animal suffering on the streets of New York. He also addresses the problem of using volunteers to enforce the cruelty laws. Other issues discussed include:

* poisoning animals.

* dog and cock fights

4) Cases prosecuted.

* neglect of farm animals [ 1 ], [ 10 ], [ 16 ]

* transportation of live chickens upside down [ 2 ]

* overworking of a horse [ 3 ],[ 5 ],[ 6 ]

* dog beating [ 4 ], horse beating [ 8 ]

* burning a rat [ 7 ]

* cruel transportation of calves [ 9 ],[ 15 ]

* cock fighting [ 11 ]

* abandonment of worn-out horses [ 12 ],[ 14 ]

* reckless driving of an unfit horse [ 13 ]

5) History . Origins of both the RSPCA in London and the ASPCA in New York. Efforts of Mr. Bergh .

6) Legal and Constitutional Status of the A.S.P.C.A. This section discusses the unique quasi governmental status of the A.S.P.C.A.

* The Fox case .

7) An appeal for funds.

8) List of publications available.

9) How to proceed against offenders.

10) Destruction of Small Animals.

Reports (the original page numbers are denoted with *X*):


*1* The American Society

For The

Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

Incorporated by the State of New York



FOR 1889

















Executive Committee.
















Assistant Treasurer,






Veterinary Surgeon,




415 Fulton Street, Brooklyn





Ladie s and Gentlemen:

Since the initiatory steps were taken to call into existence our beloved Society, having for its object the protection of those speechless servants of mankind, which minister in so many ways to our happiness and profit, a quarter of a century has nearly elapsed. It is not my purpose, however, at this time, to review the work accomplished during that long period, nor the unremitting labor devoted thereto with a fidelity and zeal worthy of such a cause, and which have produced such beneficent results.

In view of what has been accomplished in the past, I am fully conscious of the great responsibilities I assumed when I accepted the honorable office of President of your Society.

In presenting this, the twenty-fourth annual report of the Society's work, I will but briefly allude to a few matters of interest, believing that you will find in the detailed reports of the Executive Committee, Treasurer, and Superintendent, more gratifying information.

It affords me much pleasure, however, to announce, that your official residence has been remodeled, and made more convenient for the needs of your Society, and the preservation and compilation of accumulated records and reports relating thereto, and which may be required in the distant future, to give to a new people the history of the birth and progress of the Parent Institution of this Continent, having for its object not only the protection of defenceless dumb creatures, but by practice and precept to inculcate in the minds of the people sentiments of kindness and forbearance towards the helpless.

Other changes have also been made, having in view better sanitary conditions, and conveniences for the officers attached to Head-quarters.

A new drinking fountain of large capacity, for man and beast, *6* has replaced the one formerly in use in front of the building, and many other improvements added to the premises, having for their object increased facilities for carrying on the work of humanity.

The necessity for improved methods pertaining to the Ambulance and derrick service, prompted your Executive Committee to set apart a portion of the funds of the Society towards the purchase of land, and the erection thereon of a suitable building for that purpose. This has been accomplished, and now, in addition to your official headquarters, you have an Ambulance house for the housing of the vehicles, also horses, and patent quick-acting harness of simple contrivance, but which possesses great advantages over the ordinary kind, all of which reduce the time of departure to a minimum, in order to despatch relief to a suffering animal in the street.

In addition to the improvements mentioned, kennels for the care and comfort of all kinds of small animals have been provided in the building; likewise an apartment for the humane destruction of those found sick, injured, or otherwise disabled.

The patrol wagon service has been extended and improved. Hardly a day passes but what the usefulness of this department of our work is demonstrated, as the following incident will show:

The shaft of a passing vehicle entered the body of a horse that was standing on Broadway near 20th Street. The wound was a terrible one, and no doubt the poor creature would have bled to death but for the opportune arrival of the patrol wagon with bandages and liniments. While engaged in dressing the wound, the ambulance arrived, into which the suffering animal was placed, and taken to the hospital. Under the old system this would have taken nearly an hour, during which time the horse would have had to remain on the street pending the arrival of the vehicle and assistance.

An informal inspection of the work was conducted by the several branch organizations of the Society throughout the upper part of the State convinced me that, while not as complete as might be desired, owing no doubt to opposing influences which are to be found in all communities, it is still conducted in a satisfactory and vigorous manner. *7*

I was, however, greatly exercised at the condition of the horses and mules employed on the towpaths of the several canals of the State. It seems to me that the sphere of the usefulness of your Society should be extended in that direction, and aggressive measures instituted during the entire season. Officers should be stationed along, and thoroughly police, the canal districts. This course of action would require a large expenditure of money, but the misery and physical suffering which it would prevent to the defenceless dumb creatures, compelled to toil daily, as a motive power, with ghastly wounds on their bodies unprotected from the galling harness, would compensated a thousand-fold for the outlay.

In addition to this phase of the work, there are many other places where large numbers of animals are employed -- viz., quarries, brick yards, and lumber districts, -- over which the Society could extend its protecting authority, if the condition of its treasury would permit.

In closing this, my first annual address, allow me to wish you a prosperous and happy New Year.

John P. Haines,


New York, December 31, 1889. *8*




The Executive Committee of the Society congratulates its members, and all friends of the cause of animal protection, upon the continued and ever increasing spread of the good work; also upon the recent acquisition for the furtherance of its usefulness of many practical appliances for the immediate relief of suffering animals.

Inasmuch as the several reports of the President and Superintendent give ample details of the general work done during the past year; likewise that of the Treasurer, as to its financial condition, your Committee will confine itself briefly to matters coming within the immediate sphere of its duty.

The Committee reports the election of Mr. James M. Brown to be President of the Society, vice Henry Bergh, resigned.

Also the resignation of Mr. Edwin Bergh as a member of the Executive Committee.

Also that on April 12th, last, much to the regret of your Committee, President Brown tendered his resignation, assigning as the reason therefor important business and other duties which required his almost constant attention. While regretfully accepting the resignation of Mr. Brown as President of the Society, it is our pleasure to announce that he will continue to serve the cause with his counsel and presence as a member of our Advisory Board.

Also that Mr. John P. Haines was thereupon unanimously elected President of the Society, vice James M. Brown resigned.

Since Mr. Haines' election he has devoted most of his time to the duties of his office, and has thoroughly reorganized and systematized the affairs of the Society, and under his supervision the headquarters have been enlarged and repaired, and an ambulance house built, and extensive alterations and changes have been made in the offices of the Society, to which we invite your *9* attention, enabling it to conduct its business more systematically than heretofore.

Also the election as members of the Executive Committee, Mr. Frederic R. Coudert and the Hon. William Waldorf Astor.

Forty-three names have been added to the yearly and life membership rolls of the Society, during the past year.

It is the painful duty of your Committee to report the demise of one of their honored associates, the late Nathan M. Beckwith, who was for many years and at the time of his death, a Vice-President of the Society.

Also that of Mrs. Ellen M. Gifford, a life member and earnest co-worker in the cause.

Likewise the decrease of Mrs. E.T. Hicks, of old Westbury, Long Island, also a life member and ardent sympathizer with all organizations engaged in the work of protecting the weak and helpless.

In addition to the above, several others of our associates have passed away from the sphere of their usefulness, whose names will be found inscribed on the obituary records of the Society.

Several new Societies for the prevention of cruelty to animals have been organized during the past year throughout the State, pursuant to the act passed by the Legislature of 1888, and are in active co-operation with the parent institution.

Laws similar to our own have been enacted by the Dominican Republic of South America, and a Society formed there for the enforcement of the humane laws. An elector of your official seal and emblem has been presented to the Organization, and its members have been welcomed to our merciful brotherhood.

Several new drinking fountains have been erected in the upper districts, thus supplying a need of long standing.

We desire to gratefully acknowledge the continued kindness of the Safe Deposit Company of New York in giving to the Society, free of rent, the use of a large safe in their vaults.

In conclusion your Committee submits, that nothing has been left undone to carry out the object of the Society, and extend the work for which it was called into being.

Geo. G. DeWitt, Jr.,

Secretary. *10*



New York, January 1, 1890.

To The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals:

The Treasurer begs leave to report that the balance brought over December 31, 1888, was $50,738.73. The receipts from all sources during the year ending December 31, 1889, were $50,976,32, making a total of $101,715.05. The sum expended and invested during the year was $89,409.52, leaving a balance of $12,305.53. The following financial statement will show the sources whence the revenue has been derived, and also the accounts under which its funds have been disbursed during the above-mentioned period.

Respectfully submitted,


Treasurer *11*




1888 DR.

1889. CR.

Dec. 31. To Cash Balance on deposit in Union

Trust Co. ................................ $50,497.42

To Cash Balance in Petty Cash Drawer 241.31


" " Part of Bequest Estate W.D.

Fuller ............................ 9,685.42

" " Bequest Estate Anita Exter 320.00

" " " " Zalmon Bonnet 500.78

" " " " Caroline J.

Welton, 341 Shares Holmes,

Booth, & Haydens Stock ..... 11,290.00

" " Members' Subscriptions and

Donations to date............... 5,381.75

" " Fines................................ 2,126.15

" " Deposits on Badges.............. 21.00

" " Bond City of Poughkeepsie

redeemed......................... 1,000.00

" " Other sources...................... 20,651.22




Dec. 31. To Cash Balance on deposit Union

Trust Co................. $12,292.86

" " Balance in Petty Cash

Drawer.......... 12.67




Dec. 31 By Cash Disbursements from January

1st to date inclusive as follows:

" " For maintenance of Society...... $27,177.57

" " Fountain Account.................. 309.70

" " Taxes and Insurance............... 3,215.04

" " Improvements and repairs on

Real Estate.................... 21,656.25

" " Legal Expenses.................... 1,102.61

" " Deposit on Badges refunded..... 4.00

" " Collateral Inheritance Tax........ 2.194.35

" " Invested in 1st Mortgage R.

R Bonds .......................... 33,750.00

" " Balance on deposit in Union

Trust Co............ $12,292.86

" " Balance in Petty

Cash Drawer....... 12.67




New York, January 14, 1890. We, the undersigned, have this day examined the accounts of The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, as exhibited to us by books and vouchers, and find them correct and in accordance therewith.


) Auditing Committee

G.G. HAVEN ) *12*



In submitting this the Twenty-fourth Annual Report of the general work accomplished during the past year, it must not be assumed that every detail of duty or every official act has been embodied. To do so would take up more space that can well be accorded.

It is gratifying, however, to report that instances of wanton abuse of animals are not so frequent as heretofore, and the penalties inflicted upon offenders, and the vigilance of the Society, have undoubtedly brought about that result.

Cruelty has now to be followed to be detected, and to discover offenders requires greater watchfulness on the part of those whose province it is to enforce the laws.

The following, however, will, in a condensed form, show the character and magnitude of the work.


The several car and other stables have been officially visited from time to time by our officers, and while many horses were condemned as being unfit for railroad service, the majority were found to be in excellent condition. There are many so-called stables, however, in the city, which ought to be condemned, not only from a sanitary point of view, but for the absence of proper and adequate means of escape in case of fire. It should not be allowed to stable horses in wooden buildings, built in the rear of tenements, the entrance to which from the street is through a narrow passageway. There are many subterranean stables in the city in which from five to twenty horses are lodged, and are only kept in proper condition by reason of the constant surveillance exercised over them by our officers.

Cow-sheds in this and adjacent countries have been inspected, and several persons prosecuted and convicted for feeding cows *13* on swill, and keeping the animals in crowded and unhealthy barns.


It has been necessary to keep up a persistent warfare against shippers and consignees of live poultry. Many thousands of these animals arrive weekly in this city from Western States, in coops and crates inadequate in size to accommodate the living freight. On their arrival here, our officers insist that food, water, and ample space be at once provided, and thus in a measure mitigate their suffering pending final disposition.


Two experienced officers were detailed from headquarters, who, in conjunction with the local agents of the Society, resident along the line of the several canals of the State, thoroughly policed the towpaths.

They suspended from labor many horses and mules found working, and suffering from bleeding wounds on the breasts and shoulders, unprotected from the harness. Several boat-captains and their drivers were prosecuted for permitting the animals to be worked in the condition described, and were convicted and fined for the offence.


The city dog-pound has been visited by our officer every week, and every thing has been done for the care and comfort of the unfortunate animals proscribed by city ordinance, and awaiting death, which latter, owing to the Society's recommendation as to the mode, is a most merciful one. Several of the dog-catchers have been convicted and fined for cruelly treating the animals while engaged in their capture.


These brutal so-called sports are still indulged in, but only in places where it is most difficult for our officers to approach with *14* out being discovered. Several dog- and cock-fighting dens, however, have been raided during the past year, and over a hundred persons found participating in the brutal orgies arrested, convicted, and fined.

The animals and all the paraphernalia captured are forfeited to the Society. The proprietors of the places were likewise prosecuted, convicted, and punished for permitting their premises to be used for unlawful purposes.


The exportation of cattle, sheep, and other animals to foreign countries has assumed large proportions during the past few years. Vessels of all descriptions are in demand to transport the stock, and but for the presence of the Society's officer on board at the time of shipment, much cruelty, no doubt, would be inflicted upon the animals by the cattle-drovers. The absence of clubs and steel-pointed sticks, formerly used to prod and beat the animals, is evidence of what is being done in that direction. The quality and quantity of food and water provided for the stock during the voyage is thoroughly examined, and every thing is insisted upon which will add to the comfort of the animals while in transit, but there is no doubt that when the vessel gets outside of the jurisdiction of the State the poor creatures are subjected to neglect and abuse.


The cowardly offence of dropping small pieces of meat or brad impregnated with poison, with the intent that it should be eaten by a neighbor's cat or dog, out of revenge or for some fancied wrong, has given the Society much trouble. Many animals have thus been subjected to prolonged suffering and death. Detection and conviction is seldom possible in such cases, owing to the fact of the law requiring positive proof of actually seeing the placing of the poisoned food "with the intent that it shall be taken by an animal."

Several persons, however, have been prosecuted, convicted, and severely punished during the past year for the offence, al- *15* though, in one instance, it took several weeks to secure the necessary evidence.

President Haines has offered a reward of $25.00 for information that will lead to the arrest and conviction of any person guilty of the offence described, and has caused posters to be distributed throughout the State, calling attention to the matter.


Pursuant to instructions from President Haines, the undersigned, with six of the Society's officers, went to Hicksville, Queens County, Long Island, on December 7th last, and there arrested two of the principals engaged in the so-called sport of rabbit-baiting. To enumerate all the cruel details incidental to the chasing and killing of rabbits by dogs in an enclosed field would doubtless shock the sensibilities of all right-thinking people. It will suffice to state that the rabbits are captured and brought from some Western State to a Long Island farm, and there kept in bondage until it pleases the members of the club, to whom the animals are sold, to drive them out one at a time into the field described, where they are chased by dogs until caught and killed.

This manly (?) pastime was criticised by a farmer's daughter who was present at the last bait in the following outspoken language: "They (alluding to the clubmen) call themselves men! I'd like to see them all spanked!" The prisoners were arraigned before the local magistrate, and charged with violating certain of the provisions of section 655 of the Penal Code, viz., "instigating and furthering acts of cruelty to animals." One of the defendants demanded immediate trial by jury, and well-known local counsel was employed by the club to defend him. The Society's prosecuting officer presented the case clearly from a legal stand-point, and showed the mutilated body of the rabbit as evidence of the character of the "sport." The jury remained out some time, but finally rendered a verdict of not guilty. The other defendant was tried at night-time before the same Justice and a jury with the same result.

Elated by the verdicts, another bait was indulged in by the same club and at the same place. The slipper of the dogs was promptly arrested by the Society's officer, who, to the surprise of those present, suddenly put in an appearance on the field. The prisoner likewise demanded a trial by jury, and was acquitted. Representative citizens of Long Island, however, condemn the foreign innovation under the name of coursing, and characterize it as a brutal pastime.


Officers of the Society have attended exhibitions, theatres, and other places where animals were employed or used in performances with the view of preventing their improper treatment or abuse.

The cruel practice of snaring and trapping song-birds is still carried on in defiance of the special laws enacted for their protection. Our officers have, on several occasions, while patrolling the outlying districts, seized and destroyed the paraphernalia used for the purpose, which is usually set up in vacant lots, adjacent to parks or private grounds.

The horses and mules employed on the new aqueduct have been looked after, likewise those working underground. The animals were found, in the main, to be in good condition. A number, however, were suspended from labor, owing to physical disability, and several humanely destroyed, being found past further use.


Although our uniformed force is limited as to number, officers have been detailed to patrol the streets through the night. They have visited markets, ferries, depots, hack-stands, and other places in their official capacity, and much good has been accomplished thereby.


Many local agents of the Society, resident throughout the State report that while they have not found it necessary to prosecute persons for abusing animals, the knowledge that they have the authority to do so is a menace to the cruelly inclined. *17*


The Brooklyn department of our work has been most efficient in the discharge of the manifold duties requiring attention.


The following table shows, in a condensed form, the work accomplished during the past twenty-four years:

Cases prosecuted in the Courts....................................................... 15,790

Disabled Animals temporarily suspended from work............................. 39,214

Horses, disabled past recovery, humanely destroyed............................. 29,366

Disabled Horses removed from the Streets in the Ambulances................. 5,346


The aggregate result for the year 1889 is as follows:

Cases prosecuted in the Courts....................................................... 949

Disabled Animals temporarily suspended from work............................. 2,357

Horses, disabled past recovery, humanely destroyed............................. 2,812

Small Animals, disabled past recovery, humanely destroyed................... 705

Disabled Horses removed from the Streets in the Ambulances................. 407

Complaints received and investigated............................................... 2,793

In conclusion, the undersigned respectfully commends to favorable notice the new distinctive uniform now worn by the Society's officers of New York and Brooklyn, also to the conspicuous zeal and intelligent judgment exercised in all matters affecting their official duties.

Respectfully submitted,



The following are some of the more important cas es prosecuted during the past year:


Jan. 2 Davis Felton, for twisting, or what is known as "locking" the wings of poultry, then throwing the animals in a violent manner to the stone floor. This offence took place in the building designated by the Board of Health for the purpose of killing poultry. It is necessary to keep one of our officers constantly in attendance there, to prevent abuse of the animals. Fined ten dollars. Court Special Sessions. *18*

Jan. 8 [17] George Shuttleworth, for striking a horse on the head with an iron shovel. "I lost my temper," was the excuse. Fined five dollars. Court Special Sessions.

Jan. 10 Wm. Berkley (driver), leading a crippled mule through the streets. Fined ten dollars by Judge Massey. Went to jail in default of fine.

Patrick McCarthy (owner), causing and procuring the above-named offence to be committed. Fined ten dollars by Judge Massey.

Jan. 11 [18] Thos. McCormac, setting dogs to fight on the public highway. The offender was requested by a lady to cease urging the dogs to fight but he replied insolently, and encouraged them on the more. While so engaged, he was arrested by one of the Society's officers. Realizing his danger, he commenced to cry for mercy, and even appealed to the land he had insulted. Sentenced to serve five days in jail by Judge Kenna.

Jan. 12[ 24] F.D. Harris, for cruelly beating a horse. The offender made use of a black-snake whip, and the horse's body was covered with ridges from the effect of the blows. Fined ten dollars by Judge Massey.

Jan. 26 Alfred Wood, carrying live poultry by the legs, with the head hanging down. It is a practice indulged in by pedlars, but owing to the vigilance of our officers is of very rare occurrence. Fined ten dollars. Court of Special Sessions.

Feb. 16 [19] John Jenkins, beating a horse on the body with an iron rod, simply because the horse became frightened at a passing object, and shied a little. Fined twenty-five dollars by Judge Kenna. Went to jail in default.

Feb. 22 [20] John Barth, Chas. Watson, Jos. Burnham, Benj. Carpenter, Thos. Lewis, James Anderson, John Brown, engaging in, as witnesses to, a cock-fight, at Flushing, L.I. About 10 o'clock on the night of Feb. 22d last, a crowd of ruffians were assembled in a roadside hotel at Flushing, Long Island, to witness a cock-fight. Every thing being in readiness, the so-called sport began, but was suddenly interrupted by the breaking down of doors and windows, and the entrance of a squad of the Society's officers. There were at least a hundred against twelve, hence it will be seen why so few were captured. The distance to court was long, and through a lonely wood, and with the prisoners, pit, and birds seized at the time, the officers had their hands full. Fined fifteen dollars each by Justice McKenna.

Feb. 22 Wm. Hill, for permitting above-named cock-fight to take place on his premises. Fined fifteen dollars by Judge McDonald. *19*

April 16,18,19 [35] Patrick Looney, 227 E. 64th Street; Patrick Holohan, 1071 First Ave.; James Lawler, 566 Lexington Ave., for dog-fighting. This offence took place in Bloomingdale Bros'. stables, E. 64th Street. One of the dogs died a few days after being captured by our officers from the terrible wounds received while fighting. Two of the defendants elected to be tried by jury. They were indicted, and, when called for trial before Judge Martine in the Court of General Sessions, requested that their cases be sent to the Court of Special Sessions for trial, presided over by Judges Smith, Kilbreth, and Patterson. Lawler pleaded guilty, but Looney went to trial, which resulted in his conviction. The surviving dog was forfeited to the Society, and is now enjoying the benefits of a good home, and is the pet of his new master. Fined one hundred dollars each by Court of Special Sessions.

April 18. Thos. Welsh, abusing a team of mules. This defendant was drunk at the time, and insisted on his right to do as he pleased with "my own property." Fined ten dollars by Judge Walsh.

April 22. [21] John Ennis, for biting the ear of a dog! The animal, a fine St. Bernard, the pet and playfellow of the children, and general favorite, was sleeping on the floor of his master's saloon, when Ennis, in a half-drunken condition, entered. Accustomed to being petted and stroked by the patrons of the place, the dog remained still when Ennis approached and stooped as if to pat its head, but instead of doing so, he seized one of the ears in his teeth, and before any one could interfere, bit it off. The dog, instead of springing at his cowardly assailant, walked over to where his master stood. At the sight of his mutilated favorite, the first impulse was to take the law into his own hands. Wiser counsel prevailed, however, and the case was reported to the Society. The brutal offender was promptly arrested. He demanded trial by jury, was convicted, and sentenced to the penitentiary for one year, and to pay a fine of five hundred dollars, and to stand committed until the fine shall be paid, by Judge Massey.

April 25. Patrick Cochrane, overloading a horse, which at the time was lame and suffering in its body and limbs. Fined ten dollars by Judge Powers.

May 7. Matt. Cunningham, driving a horse attached to a loaded express wagon while lame, sore, weak, and feeble. Fined ten dollars by Court of Special Sessions.

May 13. [22] Theo. Horstmann, throwing poisoned meat into his next-door neighbor's yard, which was eaten by two dogs, causing their death. The reason assigned for poisoning the animals was that they were annoying. The dogs were small Skye terriers, and never annoyed anyone. Fined one hundred dollars by Court of Special Sessions. *20*

May 20. [23] John Devlin, beating a horse with an iron car-hook. The defendant was a driver on the Belt Road, and while on his up trip the horse got one of his forefeet outside of the trace chain. Devlin, instead of getting off the car and adjusting the trace, attempted to do so from the platform, which he failed to do. Finally, becoming angry, he got down and struck the animal several savage blows with his car-hook, cutting the flesh and laming the horse. Fined twenty-five dollars by Court of Special Sessions.

May 20. George Stolz, beating a cow upon the back with an iron shovel. Fined ten dollars by Judge Goetting.

May 24. Timothy O'Connor, assaulting an officer of the Society while in the discharge of his duty. The officer was engaged in arresting the driver of a horse for cruelly beating the animal, when O'Connor undertook to interfere and attempt a rescue. Fined twenty-five dollars by Court of Special Sessions.

May 24. Nicholas Richter, cruelly beating a horse on the head and body with a whip. The horse was somewhat balky, and Richter, losing his temper, struck it several blows on the head, which made matters worse. He then beat the animal most cruelly on the body, when he was arrested. Fined ten dollars by Court of Special Sessions.

May 25. Jacob Goldsmith, working horse while in a weak and feeble condition. The animal was attached to a truck, heavily loaded with furniture. Fined ten dollars by Court of Special Sessions.

May 27. [25] Hugh Prior, striking horse with iron ice-tongs. The animal refused to back, which so exasperated the driver that he struck the horse several blows with the ice-tongs. Fined ten dollars by Court of Special Sessions.

June 7. Joseph Young, wilfully driving a loaded truck over a horse's foot. Fined ten dollars by Judge Goetting.

June 8. Peter Yosterman, killing canary birds, by throwing at them a flower pot filled with dirt, to annoy the owner. Fined five dollars by Judge Goetting.

June 8. [26] Herman Ulfers, Dog-fighting, Fined ten dollars

John McGibbon, " " "

James McGaly, " " "

Edw. Deegan, " " "

Michael O'Griffin, " " "

Thos. Griffin, " " "

John Griffin, " " "

James Sheehan, " " "

Wm. Betts, " " " *21*

Jeremiah Reardon, Dog-fighting Fined ten dollars

Valentine Mann " " "

Geo. Lippoth, " " "

Jas. McNaney, " " "

John Quinn, " " "

Geo. Grant, " " "

Silas Southworth, " " "

John Kelly, " " "

Patrick Jane " " "

John Connolly, " " "

John Clark, " " "

John Dunnigan, " " "

Geo. McCoy, " " "

Chas. Heath, " Fined twenty dollars

Edw. Holligan, " " "

Chas. Beebe, " " "

Jas. Waitford, " " "

John McGrath, " " "

Thos. McGrath, " " "

Chas. McCarty, " " "

David Munroe, " " "

This dog-fight took place in an underground apartment of a liquor saloon. The above-named offenders were seated on boards arranged in amphitheatre form around the pit, in which the dogs were fiercely fighting. Not a sound was heard but the heavy breathing of the struggling animals. The silence was rudely broken, however, by a crash, the only door leading to the den fell in, and to the consternation of the assembled ruffians a squad of officers entered. The entire gang, with the dogs and implements pertaining to the fight, were seized and taken to the station-house. All of the offenders were convicted and fined as above by Judge Kavanagh. The dogs and other property were forfeited to the Society, pursuant to statute.

June 8. [36] James Crowley, for permitting the above-mentioned dog-fight to take place on his premises. Fined fifty dollars by Judge Kavanagh.

June 10. Zeinich Eichler, thrusting two fingers in the eye of a steer about to be slaughtered. This cruel practice was indulged in to a great extent by butchers' assistants some time ago, but, owing to the vigilance of our officers, is almost entirely suppressed. It is done in order to get the animal's head in better position for execution. Fined ten dollars by Court of Special Sessions.

June 14. [27] Paul Dintle, of Staten Island, for unjustifiably beating a horse with a piece of two-inch board. Fined ten dollars by Judge Casey. *22*

June 14. Hy. Hienon, driving a horse having bleeding sores on body, unprotected from harness. Fined twenty-five dollars by Judge Casey.

June 25. Geo. Carlton, John Murphy, Levi Smith, James Ford, Fred Muller, Geo. Brechter, T.E. Brunner, John Wilson, Ridgewood. These offenders were gathered around a dog-pit, in which two dogs were fiercely fighting, about 12 o'clock at night, in a bar-room at Ridgewood, Long Island. Being in such a lonely place, and so late at night, they imagined themselves safe from intrusion. Suddenly doors and windows were broken down, and, to the consternation of the brutal ruffians, the Society's officers entered the building. The dogs and all the paraphernalia pertaining to the orgie were seized, and, with the prisoners, were taken to the lock-up at Maspeth. Fined ten dollars each by Justice McDonald.

June 25. Charles Harlow, Ridgewood, for permitting the above mentioned fight to take place on his premises. Fined forty dollars by Justice McDonald.

June 28. John Fallon, overdriving a horse, against the express orders of the owner, who prosecuted the offender through the Society. Fined ten dollars by Judge Borkamp and a jury.

July 1. John Jacobs, overdriving a pony. Fined fifteen dollars by Judge McGuire.

July 2. Reinhold Judesleben, beating and kicking a cow having broken legs, because the animal was unable to get up and walk out of the barn. Fined twenty-five dollars by Judge Casey.

July 5. Adolph Mathers, setting a dog to bit and worry a cat, and breaking cat's legs. Fined ten dollars by Court of Special Sessions.

July 6. Edward Murphy, Charles Macey, Waterford, N.Y., overdriving and cruelly beating a horse. Fined twenty-five dollars each by Justice of the Peace.

July 7. John Mackin, driving a horse having sores on body unprotected from harness. Fined fifteen dollars by Judge Casey.

July 8. Emil Florin, Stapleton, S.I., depriving a horse of necessary sustenance, food, and drink. Fined fifteen dollars by Judge McGruder.

July 15. Max Lighte, for keeping cows in crowded and unhealthy stables. Fined thirty dollars by Judge McGruder.

July 16. John Kearney, for keeping, exposing, and refusing to have a horse, diseased with glanders, destroyed, after knowledge of its condition. Fined fifty dollars by Judge Goetting. *23*

July 19. Leopold Wertheim, pushing four calves from his truck to the sidewalk, calves falling on their backs. At the suggestion of the Society, the owner of live-stock-carrying vehicles provided cleated boards for unloading the animals on their arrival at the slaughter-houses. In the absence of our officers, drivers of the trucks invariably omit to use the plank, thinking it too much trouble, and throw the animals out of the vehicle like bundles of wood. This practice is rarely indulged in now. Fined ten dollars by Court of Special Sessions.

July 19. Leser Cohen, 56 Hester street, twisting the wings of fowl and throwing them on stone floor--a cruel practice which some men seem to adopt who handle large numbers of these fowl. Fine five dollars by Court of Special Sessions.

July 26. Wm. O'Sullivan, driving a horse while in a disabled condition. Fined fifty dollars by Judge Casey.

July 30. Adam Wright, newton, L.I., selling a horse diseased with farcy. The horse referred to had been sent to the offender to be killed, he being the official contractor for disposing of such cases. Instead of doing his duty, he sold the diseased animal for three dollars. Fined ten dollars by Judge Scheplon.

Aug. 3 [28] Hy. Hillebrand, Brooklyn, inciting a dog to worry and kill a cat. This offender was quite surprised when put under arrest. When asked why he did not prevent his dog from killing the cat, he shrugged his shoulders and replied, "The dog knew his business!" Find twenty five dollars by Judge Goetting.

Aug. 9 Herman Miller Gambritte, S.I., for shooting a rabbit hound whose only offence was going into defendant's yard. Fined twenty-five dollars by Judge Casey.

Aug. 9 James McKorbe, driving a horse having bleeding sores on body unprotected from harness. Fined twenty-five dollars by Judge Casey.

Aug. 9 Tony Weiss, overdriving a horse. It was almost impossible for the animal to go another step when the officer appeared. The horse was completely exhausted. Sentenced to forty days' imprisonment by Judge McGuire.

Aug. 10 Dominick Fallow, beating a horse while in a weak and feeble condition. The animal was harnessed to a partly loaded truck and was evidently in the last stages of exhaustion. He was taken to a stable, fed and groomed, and rested for the night. Fined five dollars by Judge Peterson.

Aug. 12 [29] James Donely, Brooklyn, beating a horse with the butt-end of a whip, simply because the animal refused to cross a pile of stones lying in the street. Fined ten dollars by Judge Peterson. *24*

Aug. 13 Joe, Massineo, for overriding and beating a pony with a stick of wood: "to make him go!" was the excuse. Fined twenty-five dollars by Judge Vaughan.

Aug. 14 [37] John Fleming, throwing a cat out of a three-story window. Sentenced to twenty days in jail by Judge Goetting.

Aug. 15 Edward Whalen, driving a horse while in a weak and feeble condition. The animal had been in the hospital for several days prior to day of arrest, and instead of being exercised as directed by the veterinary surgeon, the offender compelled the sick animal to draw a loaded truck. Fined five dollars by Court of Special Sessions.

Aug. 17 James Clancey, causing sore-backed horses to be driven. Two sore and disabled horses belonging to this man were stopped the same day. Fined twenty dollars by Judge Tigh.

Aug. 18 [30] Michael Green, shooting and wounding a pig, out of spite towards the owner of the animal. Fined fifteen dollars by Justice McDonald.

Aug. 18 Chas. H. Freeman, Wm. Ketcham, John Whalen, and Wm. Koennecker, for beating and overdriving a horse to death. This horse was attached to a truck, and the offenders beat and drove the animal so furiously on the coney Island Road that the horse finally dropped dead. Fined ten, twenty, thirty, and forty dollars, respectively, by Judge Waring.

Aug. 23 Conrad Weiss, stoning chickens and breaking their legs. The defendant amused himself by throwing stones at the poultry of a neighbor, who submitted to the wrong, although several of the animals had been killed outright, before making complaint, for fear of being assaulted. The Society's officer stationed himself behind a fence, and when Weiss commenced his stone-throwing he was promptly arrested. Fined five dollars by Judge Kenna.

Aug. 27 Heinrich Spiaring, overdriving and torturing a horse which was harnessed to a loaded truck. The animal was completely worn out. Fined ten dollars by Judge Casey.

Aug. 31 Joseph A. Rogers, cruelly whipping and overdriving a team of car-horses. About 2 o'clock on the morning of August 31, 1889, two of the Society's officers were patrolling Second Avenue, near 45th Street. There is a steep incline at this place, up which the defendant was galloping and beating his horses, which were attached to a loaded car of the Second Avenue line. When he was told to stop beating the horses, he replied with an oath: "I'll stop when I please!" and at the same time striking the animals several blows with the whip. He was taken off his car and locked up. Fined five dollars by Court of Special Sessions. *25*

Sept. 3 John Schrader, working a disabled horse before a loaded wagon. The horse had large sores on his breast and was very lame. Fined ten dollars, or ten days in jail, by Judge Petersen.

Sept. 5 R. Statenstein, for keeping cows in crowded stalls and filthy stables. The animals were subsequently removed by order of the Society to cleaner and more commodious quarters. Fined twenty-five dollars by Judge McDonald.

Sept. 6 [38] Henry Mulz, Brooklyn, biting off the heads of two live kittens, simply to win a wager of a quart of beer, into which he put the decapitated heads of the animals and then drank the liquid. The magistrate, when sentencing the brutal offender, characterized the crime as one of the most atrocious cases of cruelty he had ever known. Sentenced to one year in the penitentiary by Judge Goetting.

Sept. 9 Joseph Hessler, for driving a team of horses, suffering at the time from several sores on the breast, unprotected from the harness. Fined twenty dollars by Judge McDonald.

Sept. 13 Jacob Alferder, beating calves over the head and body with a club. This offence took place in one of the slaughter-houses of this city. It is almost impossible for the Society's officers to enter such places undetected. In this instance, however, the officer entered through a window in the rear of the building, just as the offender was in the act of abusing the animals with a heavy club. Fined ten dollars by Court of Special Sessions.

Sept. 15 Valentine Kager, for cutting the ears of a dog with a pair of scissors; because, as he said, some one dared him to do it for a bet. Fined five dollars by Judge Kenna.

Sept. 16 John Silvey, driving horse with sores on neck and shoulders unprotected from the harness. Fined ten dollars by Judge Corbett.

Sept. 16 [31 ] Philomena Venteer, striking horse on the face with an axe. The wound inflicted was only slight, but the offence was entirely unprovoked, seemingly committed out of pure deviltry. Fined five dollars by Court of Special Sessions.

Sept. 16 Barney McGuire, Brooklyn, selling a horse having the contagious disease known as glanders. Fined thirty dollars by Judge Kenna.

Sept. 17 Frank Musa, driving a horse while lame, weak, and exhausted, also several sores on body under collar and saddle. Fined five dollars by Court of Special Sessions.

Sept. 17 B. Gartens, cruelly beating a horse with a whip. "Because I felt like it!" was his reply, when asked why he whipped the horse. Fined ten dollars by Judge Petersen. *26*

Sept. 21 Charles McDonnell, working a horse while sore, weak, and exhausted. Fined ten dollars by Court of Special Sessions.

Sept. 24 Harry Williams, beating a lame and crippled horse. The poor creature was too weak to drag the loaded truck to which it was attached, and the offender had recourse to an unjustifiable use of the whip. Fined five dollars by Judge Kenna.

Sept. 27 Michael Lissaute, cutting a cat's ears with a razor. The complaint in this case and the defendant were rival barbers, and while the animal--which belonged to the former--was playing on the sidewalk, the defendant coaxed it into his shop and cut its ears. The little creature was found covered with blood, and suffering great pain. The wound was dressed by the Society's officer, and the offender arrested. Fined ten dollars by Court of Special Sessions.

Oct. 8 James Carroll, beating horse with butt-end of whip. Fined five dollars by Court of Special Sessions.

Oct. 11 Chas. Schyole, cutting a cat's ears with a knife, simply because the animal went into the rear shop where the defendant was engaged cutting up meat, he being a butcher. He did not deny the act, saying "I only done it for fun!" Fined ten dollars by Court of Special Sessions.

Oct. 17 Peter Barker, beating horse over the head with butt-end of cowhide. The defendant's excuse, when arrested was: "The horse was balky." The trouble, however, was, the horse was too willing, but the load too heavy; and instead of using ordinary methods by taking off part of the load, he lost his temper and proceeded to abuse the animal as described. Fined five dollars by Court of Special Sessions.

Oct. 25 Chas. Folz, beating a horse over the body with a whip, drawing blood. This offender offered no excuse for his cruelty, in fact, he had none to make. Fined five dollars by Court of Special Sessions.

Oct. 26 Herman Vaupelt and James Devans, shooting and wounding a pet cat belonging to a neighbor. Fined ten dollars each by Judge Casey.

Oct. 28 [32] Andw. Organ, leaving a sick horse in the street to die. The animal had fallen from exhaustion, and "not caring to be bothered with the old nag any longer," the offender took off the harness and left the poor creature to its fate. Fined fifteen dollars or fifteen days in the County Jail by Judge Thayer.

Oct. 30 Martin Farrell, abandoning a sick horse to die. The case was one of unusual cruelty. The animal had been sick for some time, and the owner was warned by the Society's officer not to drive it. The advice was ignored, and one morning the horse was found by the offi- *27* cer lying in a vacant lot in a dying condition. The poor creature's sufferings were at once put an end to, and the cruel owner arrested. Fined thirty dollars by Judge Thayer.

Nov. 4 Clarence Cole, driving a lame and disabled horse. Fined fifteen dollars by Judge Butler.

Nov. 4 John Ball, working horse and mule to a canal-boat while sore, weak, and feeble. The animals were in a most deplorable condition, and excited the pity of the bystanders. The poor creatures were put in charge of a veterinary surgeon, and properly cared for. Fined thirty dollars by Justice D.T. Fox.

Nov. 14 Harris Magullis, tying the legs of two turkeys and twisting the wings over the backs, simply to carry the animals more conveniently. Fined five dollars by Court of Special Sessions.

Nov. 15 [33] John McCormac, for biting off a live duck's head during a drunken orgie, and to win a bet of a pint of beer. Sent to Penitentiary for six months by Judge Kenna.

Nov. 16 [34] John Snyder, for biting off a live turkey's head. This offender thought it a good joke, until arrested and sent for twenty-nine days to the Penitentiary by Judge Kenna.

Nov. 19 Martin J. Lennon, neglecting to care for a disabled horse. Fined five dollars by Judge Peterson.

Nov. 19 Henry Evans, working a horse while lame and unfit for any use. This horse was attached to a heavy load of stone, and, when stopped by the officer, was hardly able to move along. Fined fifteen dollars by Judge Mulholland.

Nov. 27 Geo. Herbold, N.Y. City, overloading a horse, and compelling the animal to pull the heavily loaded vehicle up a steep hill. Fined ten dollars by Judge Powers.

Nov. 29 Adolph Klein, for abandoning a sick horse to die in a vacant lot. The poor creature had been driven nearly all day before being left to its fate. Fined twenty-five dollars by Judge Thayer.

Dec. 9 Morris Rosenthal, for driving a horse while lame and sore. Fined forty dollars by Judge Casey.


*1* The American Society

For The

Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

Incorporated by the State of New York

April 10, 1866.




JOHN P. HAINES, President






















Executive Committee.









Secretary and Treasurer.



Counsel. Attorneys.



Superintendent. Veterinary Surgeon.



13 Willoughby Street.





Ladies and Gentlemen:

It is often said that nothing is so successful as success; but even success is apt to be attended with undesirable consequences. It is success, and not failure, that inspires envy and the spirit of envious detraction. It is success, and not failure, that arouses the jealousy of disappointed or ungratified, but always selfish, ambition, and "jealousy is cruel as the grave."

For years past our Society has been made to feel the truth of these observations, but never more keenly than during the year which has just closed. It is a simple fact, easily to be verified by any candid person who will take the trouble to investigate our operations, that the work of this Society, local and general, is more varied in character, more complicated in its details, and enormously greater in its aggregate than that of any other similar society in the world. In saying so I do not mean to disparage the only other society with which our own Society can be justly compared. The Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals in England excels us in the amount of its general work; but it has no such local work as ours, and the local work of this Society is enormously greater than that which is done in connection with the Battersea Home for Lost Dongs in London, though that excellent institution has the assistance of the entire metropolitan police of London, while our own work is done exclusively by our own employees. To put it briefly, the work of The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty *6* to Animals is in some respects greater than that of both of those admirable institutions, while our general work, I trust, may yet enter into a friendly rivalry with that of the Royal Society.

Unfortunately these very facts have made enemies for us. Persons who, in all their lives, have never been known to take the slightest interest in the work of animal protection, are eager, now that our cause has won the sympathy and touched the conscience of the public, would fain become the champions of a victorious cause, and find an easy way to notoriety, if not to fame, by proposing themselves as substitutes for the Society which has fought the good fight and won the battle. When these persons shall have done something more than tell the public of the great things they intend to do, it may be worth while to answer their voluminous and vociferous assaults upon a society which has been too intent upon its proper work to pay much attention to its detractors. Until that time these apostles of large promise but of no performance must be classed with Mr. Snodgrass in the famous battle of Ipswich, when that gallant gentleman threw off his coat and told the people to stand back because he was just going to begin!

Some of these large newspaper promises have already had a fair trial followed by dismal failure, not always, by any means, through ill-intent, but simply because of inexperience and ill-founded self-confident. Like everything else in modern society, the work of animal protection, however simple it may seem, is difficult and complicated. None of the many works of humanity and charity which adorn the progress of the present age requires more constant attention to details or a more systematic arrangement of its operations. The advantage of our Society in the prosecution of its duties at the present time lies very largely in the systematic methods which have grown up year by year at the suggestion of a large and unique experience. I think I might go so far as to say that those methods are not only systematic but scientific; and that is why the work seems to outsiders to be so easy that any tyro *7* might succeed in it. One rather striking illustration of this error occurred not long ago in the establishment of an institution with an attractive name, which promised all sorts of great things, and succeeded only in causing much additional suffering to a few hundred of wretched creatures which ought to have been mercifully destroyed. It was almost a matter of course that this well-meant but disastrous expedient was publicly announced to be necessary because of glaring neglect on the part of our Society.

In another way success in such work as ours brings bitter opposition. The final expulsion of pigeon shooting from the State of New York made for us hundreds of bitter enemies, not so much among sportsmen as among craftsmen whose trade was injured by the stoppage of that inhuman butchery. A similar success in New Jersey made us many enemies in that State; and the stoppage of the inhuman hunting of a poor fawn by a pack of dogs, slight as that incident was in the operations of a Society like ours, brought down upon us a relentless newspaper persecution in which the columns of the press were plied in the circulation of complaints and accusations for which there were no foundations.

Meanwhile the Society has kept on its accustomed way, doing its duty, and doing it, I think, successfully.

The Young Defenders' League has grown steadily and far more rapidly than could have been anticipated, the increase in the City of New York alone during the past year being over 20,000. I do not, of course, imagine that every one of these Young Defenders is either intelligent or active in the protection of animals; but I do say as a matter of knowledge that the thousands who have joined the Young Defenders' League have made, and are now making, a deep impression upon the children of this great city in favor of justice and kindness to dumb creatures.

Few things could more clearly or more painfully demonstrate the success of the Society in its local work than the preposterous demands which are made upon it. In the winter of 1903-4, when the extraordinary severity of the weather made the streets *8* of New York almost impassable for man or beast, there was great suffering to horses; and then, to read the complaints in the newspapers, one would have thought that our Society was to blame for the heaps of snow and ice which caused the trouble; also that our Society was to blame because people would not provide their horses with proper shows as we had over and over again urged them to do; and then it was seriously contended that this Society ought to sand the slippery streets of the city from end to end, and so prevent immense suffering to animals. We did indeed provide bags of sand which were given gratuitously to all drivers who would take them, and along with them printed instructions for its use. But to sand the streets of New York! I wonder whether even you, ladies and gentlemen, have any idea of the meaning of that undertaking? In the first place, we should not have been allowed to do it; for the care of the streets belongs to the Commissioner of Highways and the commissioner of Street Cleaning, and while our Society has the honor to be a servant of the State within its won definitely restricted line of duty, it is not permitted to supersede the authorities of State or City in their several departments.

Suppose, however, that this sanding of the streets of the City of New York had been within our province, how much do you suppose it would have cost? In the Boroughs of Manhattan, Bronx and Brooklyn, not including the Boroughs of Queens and Richmond, of Greater New York, there are 990 miles of paved streets, and it is estimated the sand and labor alone would have cost $16 per mile each time that it was used during the many weeks of that dreadful winter.

Another of our difficulties is the enormous number of frivolous complaints that are sent day by day to the Society, often through the post-office, and still oftener by telephone. From time to time a complaint appears in a newspaper that some one has telephoned to the Society, and that his call has not been instantly attended to. The complaint, of course, is sometimes perfectly just; for our force of employees is limited, and the *9* calls upon us are almost innumerable. But the most vexatious thing of all is that, when our men investigate these complaints, it is found in over seventy-five cases out of every hundred that the complaint is frivolous . Even when these calls ask us to send an ambulance to remove sick or disabled small animals, in thirty-five cases out of every hundred the ambulance driver finds no disabled animal to be removed! Only a few years ago our Society had no such trouble as that. Our difficulty was to get the public to cooperate with us by giving notice of cases in which our intervention was required. Now, the trouble is that a too appreciative public expects us to be everywhere and to go everywhere, even when there is nothing to be done, and so it comes to pass that literally three-fourths of the calls answered by our hard-worked force are merely idle and the work of answering them is wasted.

I shall now report to you the statistics of our work done during the past year, so far as it is possible to report it in that way:

1904 1903

Arrests and prosecutions .......................................... 753 587

Animals suspended from labor .................................. 4,499 3,041

Horses, mules and other large animals, disabled past re-

covery, humanely destroyed ............................ 4,287 4,288

Small animals, homeless or disabled past recovery,

humanely destroyed ...................................... 81,865 83,012

Disabled horses and other large animals removed from

the streets in ambulances ................................ 710 544

Cases investigated ................................................. 41.055 39,236

Horses examined .................................................. 63,285 ........

In the arrests and prosecutions you will perceive that there has been an increase of something over 28 per cent, over the number reported in 1903; in the number of animals suspended from labor, very nearly 48 per cent; in the number of large animals removed from the streets in ambulances, an increase of 30 per cent. The number of animals large and small that have been humanely destroyed remains about the average. The number of cases investigated is also about the average. A new *10* item which I have thought it proper to introduce is that of " Horses Examined" in the streets to discover whether they are suffering from concealed sores or any malady which would justify their suspension from labor. The number of these examinations reported is 63,285; that is 1,217 per week, and an average of 173 on every day of the year.

Another part of our work, the value of which cannot be estimated in figures, nor perhaps in any other way, is the educational work of the Society, and especially the modest magazine which appears under the title of OUR ANIMAL FRIENDS. Our occasional leaflets have been found exceedingly useful; but our magazine has been simply invaluable as the expounder of our cause. Many a contribution has come to us through its influence, and yet it hardly ever begs. It has won many a fair-minded man to our side by its plain statements of fact, and its plain exposition of the reasons of our course. Its unsparing exposures of fraudulent self-seeking in attempted raids upon the public treasury has defeated many a scheme in which animal protection was the cloak of jobbery. Over and over again, when some great battle for animal protection has been going on, a free distribution of OUR ANIMAL FRIENDS among the press of the country has enabled editors to judge for themselves of the merits of the matter in dispute, and has never failed to win able advocates of our cause. Thus this small magazine has really served as sword and shield in many a bygone contest; and it still remains as useful and as indispensable as ever.

Ladies and gentlemen, I have only one more small matter to mention to you: I mean the new button of our Society -- a pin for women, and for men a handsome button for the coat lapel. I have found that many members of our Society desired a button of that kind, and I trust that in the years to come it may be worn by many of you. It is not intended to be sold, nor even to be given away. It is to remain the property of the Society, and to be returned to the Society in case the wearer dies, or resigns. This matter has been fully explained in OUR ANIMAL *11* FRIENDS and needs no further discussion. I trust, however, that, ere long, thousands of our friends may proclaim their approbation of our cause by wearing the emblem of our Society. I wish you all a Happy New Year.



December 31, 1904. *12*



New York, January 1, 1905

To The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals:

The Treasurer begs to submit the following report for the year ending December 31, 1904, showing a Cash Balance on hand of $11,068.55.



Treasurer. *14*

JOHN MASON KNOX, Treasurer, in account with THE AMERICAN



To Cash balance, Dec. 31, 1903 .............................................. $ 2,404.40

" Bequests, Chas. H. Meeker .................................... $ 519.81

Frida Wolff ........................................... 530.00

Lena Offenbach ...................................... 100.00

Ida Elkins ............................................. 100.00

Maria A. Rickhow .................................. 2,300.00

Hanrietta Jennings .................................. 950.00

Amanda M. Coe .................................... 3,764.72

Geo. Gardener Grennell .......................... 18,885.30


" Members' Dues and General Donations .................................. 13,204.55

" Fines ............................................................................ 8,575.95

" Rentals, Dividends, Interest, Licenses, etc. ............................. 86,630.34


We, the undersigned, have examined the foregoing accounts of the Animals, and have verified the same by the Society's books and vouchers. *15*




By Disbursements from Jan. 1, 1904, to date: General Maintenance,

including Light, Fuel, Postage, Salaries, etc. .............. $33,370.65

[presumably this includes the full salaries for 22 full time special agents]

" Equipment and Maintenance of New York Shelter ................. 35,361.56

Brooklyn Shelter ................... 17,178.38

Richmond Shelter .................. 6,417.50

" Brooklyn Office: Maintenance .................................... 6,672.30

" Ambulance House, New York: Maintenance, including Feed,

Food, and Medicine for Homeless and Abandoned

Animals; debit balance ......................................... 359.38

" Ambulance House, Brooklyn: Maintenance, including Feed,

Food, and Medicine for Homeless and Abandoned

Animals; debit balance ......................................... 64.21

" Repairs to Real Estate, Rent, Interest, Taxes, and Insurance .... 5,495.83

" Legal Expenses ........................................................... 3,644.92

" Fountain Account ........................................................ 877.82

" Humane Literature ...................................................... 9,478.61

" Stationery, Printing, Annual Report, etc. ........................... 2,967.02

" Ullmann Estate: Mrs. Thayer ......................................... 700.00

" Young Defenders' League, debit balance ........................... 232.00

" Library Account ......................................................... 159.77

" Lecture Fund ............................................................. 989.48

" Deposits on Badges ..................................................... 20.00

" Horse Hat Account, debit balance .................................... 230.95

" Furniture and Fixture Account ........................................ 551.50

" Sand Bag Account, debit balance ..................................... 44.70

" Uniform Account ........................................................ 46.92

" Water Basins for Dogs and Cats Account, debit balance ......... 330.25

" Real Estate, Stapleton ................................................... 1,702.55

" Cash Balance, Dec. 31, 1904 .......................................... 11,068.55


Treasurer of the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to


WILLIAM FAHNESTOCK,) Auditing Committee.




It is impossible in the limited space and time allotted to give even a condensed report of the whole year's work of the Society. The statistical report is a strong proof of the Society's activity, but the amount of animal suffering that has been prevented and alleviated cannot be estimated or realized except by those who have taken an active part in the work and assisted in its accomplishment.

Cruelty is not always caused through wantonness. Ignorance and carelessness are very often the causes which lead to animal abuse; our asphalt paved streets are responsible for more than two-thirds of animal suffering.

Observe a horse after walking on stone pavement suddenly step on asphalt, and you will notice a change instep and movement of the body. The animal realizes it must be wary and careful of its footsteps. It is a mistaken belief that sharp caulks or the roughened iron shoe prevents falling. If a horse is not provided with rubber pads, or the streets adequately sprinkled with sand or ashes during the slippery weather, the animal had better be kept in the stable, for there is no foothold for feet shod only with iron. In my opinion, the best solution of the subject is for some Department of the City Government to thoroughly sand the asphalt pavements when the streets are slippery and dangerous for horse travel.


During the past year the Society has been held responsible for many conditions of affairs over which it had no control. *17* We have been censured for allowing asphalted streets to exist and for not having them sanded when slippery; for permitting defective pavements to exist, and in one instance for not having a certain street provided with electric lights instead of gas, so as to insure safe passage for horses. We have been berated for unavoidable delay on the part of the agents to respond to calls, and charged with neglect and indifference if a report of the investigation of a complaint does not show that the person complained of was punished, even though the information given was too vague to enable the Society to follow the investigation up or the charge was found to be frivolous or unsubstantiated. Yet every complaint is attended to when the information given is sufficient to base an investigation on.

While self-appointed workers are helpful in many respects, they are often inefficient from lack of experience and practical judgment. Unwise discrimination and hasty action on the part of unreasonable people very often bring much suffering to the object sought to be benefitted.

Horses fall and get up without assistance, yet many instances occur, where from no reason whatsoever, drivers have been detained in order to have their horses examined by an Agent of the Society, simply to gratify a desire for brief notoriety.

It does not follow that because a horse is thin in flesh it is for the want of food, neither does lameness in every case indicate physical suffering. Volunteer workers in the cause of animal protection should not act hastily, nor allow their imagination to control their judgment.

Many horses are ruined by incompetent drivers, and much cruelty inflicted by minors who should not be permitted to have the custody of animals at any time. There should be an ordinance enacted prohibiting any one under 21 years of age from driving horses through the streets of a city, and persons employing minors to drive or have custody of horses should be held criminally responsible. *18*

Since the passing away of the "Rocks," known as the horse market, the business of swapping, trading and selling horses is now conducted in a more cental part of the Borough of Manhattan. To this place equines of every color and physical ailment are brought twice a week. The young, old, lame, wind-broken, spavined, sprung of limb, all have a price. Many will not be permitted inside the market proper on account of poor physical condition, so have to take the chance of being disposed of on the outside.

Two Agents of the Society are assigned to attend each sale day. Their presence means the ending of further physical suffering for many an aged, worn-out horse, whose days of usefulness are over. Only those familiar with the methods employed by unscrupulous horse dealers can realize to what extent they will go in order to impose a useless horse upon an ignorant purchaser.

Our Agents are men of experience and when in their opinion a horse is past further use the owner usually consents to having the animal destroyed.

It is only a question of the very near future when the sale of old worn-out horses will be a thing of the past, as is the "Rocks," which, for over half a century, was the rendezvous for gypsies and horse traders.


A number of horses have been poisoned by malicious persons, out of revenge or fancied injury done to them by rival truck men. It is impossible to get the necessary legal evidence to convict the miscreant guilty of the cowardly crime.

In one case, ten horses belonging to one person were poisoned; five of them died, but the others were saved by a veterinary surgeon. The person suspected, Israel Felman, was placed on trial and many witnesses for the prosecution were *21* sworn, but none of them could testify of their own knowledge that the act was committed by the defendant, and for lack of evidence he was acquitted.

Several other similar cases were prosecuted by the Society with the same result. Rewards have been offered for information that would lead to the arrest and conviction of persons exposing poisonous substance, "with the intent that it shall be taken by an animal," but while many applicants have claimed the reward, all have failed to furnish evidence such as is the required.

Many cases of dog and cat poisoning have also been investigated. In this class of cases it is almost impossible to find the perpetrator, as it is so easy for any one so inclined to scatter poisoned food without fear of detection.


Thirty-three persons were arrested in a private stable located on Union Street in the Borough of Brooklyn while engaged in witnessing a cock fight. The pit and other paraphernalia, including 25 live and 4 dead game cocks, were captured at the time of the raid, and forfeited pursuant to the statute in such cases made and provided. All of the defendants plead guilty and were sentenced to pay a fine of $10.00 each, with the exception of two, who were convicted as principals and sentenced to pay a fine of $100.00 each.

Deputy Sheriffs of Otsego County raided a road house situated on the outskirts of the town of Richfield Springs, and arrested eighteen spectators standing around the pit in which two birds were fighting. Eight game cocks, with the two found in the pit, were captured and sent to headquarters. All the prisoners plead guilty and were sentenced to pay a fine of $10.00 each, with the exception of one, who was fined $15.00, being a principal.

Through the vigilance of our Special Agents and Sheriffs of *22* other counties of the State, many cock and dog fights were prevented.

In one instance fighting cocks and a pit were found in a room with other evidence of a contemplated cock fight, but the officers found no persons in the room, although many were gathered in the barroom and other parts of the building. After taking possession of the seventeen birds and paraphernalia about to be used for the violation of the law, the crowd was disbursed and the proprietor of the hotel warned that he would be prosecuted if he permitted his place to be used for the purpose of violating the law.

An improvised dog fight was gotten up in a rear basement on Mulberry Street, this Borough, and our Agent arrested two full-grown boys who were present, engaged in inciting the dogs to fight. There being no evidence of a premeditated dog fight, the defendants were discharged and the dogs forfeited to the Society.


Our Agents visit the livestock yards and slaughter houses daily. The handling of large cattle is done in a careful manner, with a view to preventing any injury or suffering to the animals.

Calves, sheep, hogs and milch cows are unloaded from the cars and put under cover, where they are fed and properly cared for, pending removal to final destination.


Dealers in live poultry generally respect the laws pertaining to the carrying of poultry in a humane manner, and provide crates of sufficient size to carry the animals without discomfort. Food and drink are also provided on arrival at the market.

The traffic, however, requires constant vigilance on the part *23* of the Society, in order that truck men engaged in conveying animals from place to place do not handle them in a careless or cruel manner.


The proper sanitary conditions are essential for the health and comfort of horses cannot be doubted, yet horses have been found in underground places, devoid of light and ventilation and no adequate means of escape for the animals in case of fire.

Several of these so-called stables have been condemned and horses removed owing to the vigorous action taken by the Society.

In other cases horse owners have been appealed to and given practical advice regarding the care of their animals, and the necessity for comfortable, well-ventilated stables.

It is gratifying to report that our suggestions in many instances have been acted upon with good results.


The demands upon this department of our work have been very great during the last year. Five horses and two steers were rescued from drowning by the use of the life-saving apparatus, and the ambulances for the transportation of sick and injured large animals have been in service almost daily.


Our local Agents resident along the line of the canals of the State have been active and vigilant. Their presence on the tow-path from time to time, followed by the examination of horses and mules hauling boats, serve as a warning to those inclined to use lame and sore animals. A few teams were suspended from labor owing to temporary disability. *24*


Excavations, markets, ferries, depots, hack stands, racetracks and places of amusement, where animals are employed, have been visited from time to time by our uniformed and plain clothes Agents, and everything has been done to prevent the abuse of animals and to enforce the laws of the State for their protection.

In presenting this report the opportunity is afforded me to acknowledge the many courtesies extended to the Society and its Agents from time to time by every Department of the Government, and to express appreciation of the interest taken in the Society's work by City Magistrates as evinced by the disposition of cases of cruelty to animals brought before them.

Likewise to the Justices of the Courts of Special Sessions individually and collectively for their expressed sympathy with the Society and interest in the humane work in which it is engaged, and for its dumb clients who appeal to the Court for justice.

Also to the District Attorney and his able assistants for the hearty cooperation with the Society in the prosecution of its work.

It is my painful duty to report the death of two of the Society's working force, namely, Inspector Frank O. Clark and Special Agent Alonzo S. Evans.

The former died May 13th, 1904. He was appointed a Special Agent October 31st, 1874, by the late President Bergh, and subsequently promoted by President Haines to be inspector and put in charge of the Brooklyn Department of the work, where he continued in active service, attending to his duties up to a few weeks before his death. He was zealous and faithful in the discharge of his duties pertaining to his office.

Alonzo S. Evans, Special Agent No. 1, died December 30th, 1904. On July 19th, 1871, he was appointed by the late President Bergh to be Special Agent, and from then until a short time before his death daily reported for duty. Her was iden- *27* tified with many of the most important cases prosecuted by the Society and was a faithful and reliable officer.

In conclusion, I refer with pleasure to the efficiency of all the Agents under my command. They are men of long experience, and have a thorough and practical knowledge of the laws for the protection of animals and the mode of procedure in case of arrest. They are competent to render first aid to an injured animal and to humanely end its suffering if the occasion should require.

They are intelligent, painstaking, self-respected and devoted to the Society's interest and work.

Respectfully submitted,


Superintendent. *28*


[1] The Society's Special Agent at Cooperstown, N.Y, was called to investigate a peculiarly sad case of cruelty to animals at Portlandville, N.Y., on complaint of a resident of that village. Dr. Thomas J. Evans, the offender, is an aged physician in practically destitute circumstances and living in Portlandville in an old, heavily-mortgaged building, formerly used as a hotel. A son of Dr. Evans, who lives in the West, is the owner of a farm of ninety acres one mile from Portlandville, and on that farm several cows and a horse have been kept by old Evans exposed to the intense cold of the past winter, and practically starving. Some of the animals have died of starvation. The Society's agent found the miserable barn in which they were on the farm in a state of filth. The cows were so tied that they were standing with their hind quarters almost three feet higher than their fore quarters. The sliding doors of the bar were only partly drawn together. They had no been closed in years. At the time of investigation the temperature registered about thirty degrees below zero. On questioning the people of the neighborhood who were acquainted with Evans, our agent learned the reason of the long-deferred complaint at last being made. It seems that on several occasions Evans has been warned of his danger of arrest on the charge of cruelty, and has brought the stock to the village and housed it in a better barn near his home; but after a time he returned the animals to the farm, where in the severest weather he did not go to feed or to water them. Evans was arrested by a constable on a warrant and was taken to Milford. Before the Justice's Court, Evans pleaded guilty, waiving his right to counsel. Taking into consideration the destitute condition of the prisoner and the fact that at the end of six months the mortgage on his home will be foreclosed and he will be obliged to live with his son, the committing magistrate sentenced Evans *29* to six months' imprisonment in the Albany Penitentiary, the sentence to be suspended for good behavior. Evans was then severely reprimanded by the Court and warned to care properly for the animals during the time that they will be in his charge. On the first word of complaint he will have to suffer the penalty imposed by the Court.

A SPECIAL AGENT of the Society arrested Bernard Ford for driving a very lame horse. Arraigned before Justices Keady, Fleming and Fitzgerald, in the Second Division of the Special Sessions Court, Ford said that the animal had been laid up for five months, and that he was merely exercising him. The Court, however, found him guilty, and imposed a fine of $20, with twenty days in jail as an alternative.

[2] For transporting living chickens, tied by their feet to the sides of a wagon, with their heads hanging down outside, a Special Officer of the Society arrested Pasquale Emanuele. Emanuele was in prison for four days before he could get bail. This fact was taken into consideration by Justices Wyatt, McKean and Hinsdale, of the First Division of the Court of Special Sessions, when the case came before them. They fined the prisoner only $10, with the alternative of five days' imprisonment.

On complaint of a Special Officer of the Society, William Wood, of King's Corners, Yates County, was tried at Penn. Yan, before Justice of the Peace Joseph St. John, for cruelty to a horse. Wood was found guilty and was fined $10. He paid the fine. The horse was in so wretched a condition that it had to be humanely destroyed.

The work of the special agents of this Society in the counties of the State of New York deserves mention. So few persons have any idea what these disinterested and generous-hearted men accomplish for the "cause" that we feel the latest report of Agent Miron Fletcher in Warren County will be of interest. Mr. Fletcher's letter, from which we quote, is dated March 3, 1904.

"According to your instructions sent me on January 25," Mr. Fletcher writes to President Haines, "I started as soon as the condition of the roads would permit me to visit the lumber camps." On February 19 Mr. Fletcher visited a camp, twenty miles from his home. There he inspected the thirty horses in use for two camps, the next day, February 20, driving fourteen miles farther on his tour. The following day, he drove twenty-one miles to camps at which he inspected thirty-one horses. Then nineteen miles to Newcomb, he traveled to examine forty horses, going on to Blue Mountain Lake, a distance of twenty-seven miles, *30* where he examined sixteen horses, and next day returning home, he made thirty miles. In all, the journey covered a distance of a hundred and thirty-one miles, one hundred and seventeen horses being examined in the camps, besides many horses which were met with along the road carrying supplies for the camps. It is pleasant to note that Mr. Fletcher found only a few actually disabled horses, of which none were in use. The jobbers in the lumber district had finished their work and had "lain off their cripples." Some of the animals showed the effect of hard usage merely in being thin. This past winter, as everyone knows, was unusually severe. The horses at work in the woods were exposed to the continuous cold, without relief of those thaws which pack the snow, and with no break in their labors to allow them consecutive days of rest. Mr. Fletcher thinks that great good will result from his trip, as the hundreds of men in the camps represent many different localities. The men understand that the condition of their horses was noticed, and that any cruelty would have been punished by law.

[3] A SPECIAL OFFICER of the Society charged Gershom Gell, a Russian , before Justices Holbrook, Olmstead and McKean, in the First Division of the Court of Special Sessions, with working a horse that had a large sore on its withers unprotected from the saddle. Gell pleaded guilty, but declared that he was only the driver, and did not think he was to blame. He was fined $20, with the alternative of spending ten days in the City Prison; and a warrant was issued for his employer for causing the horse to be worked in its diseased condition.

[4] A CITIZEN was the complainant against Philip Oertel, a waiter, whom he charged with beating a dog with his fist and with a knotted leather strap. Police Officer Thomas O'Grady, of the Twenty-first Precinct, arrested Oertel with some difficulty, the waiter resisting and assaulting him. Oertel was held in $100 to answer, and by Justices Wyatt, Mayer and Olmstead, in the Second Division of the court of Special Sessions, was found guilty and was fined $15. A further fine of $25 was imposed as punishment for the assault, the presiding justice warning Oertel that if similar charges were made against him, he would be send to jail without the option of a fine.

[5] P. BECKER, a fruit dealer of Yonkers, N.Y., was arrested by a Special Agent of the Society for causing and permitting George Singleton to drive a bay horse while the animal was suffering from a sore on the back and from one on the off fore leg, unprotected from the harness. Becker was found guilty and was sentenced to pay a fine of $10, *33* with the alternative of serving for ten days in the County Jail. He paid the fine.

[6] For cruelty in allowing a horse from his stable to be driven in a horrible condition of lameness, Michael Morris, of Castile, Wyoming county, N.Y., was arrested by the Society's Special Agent. Morris is a liveryman. The Society's agent was notified of the horse's lameness, and went to the stable with a warrant for Morris. He found there what he reports as one of the worst cases of cracked hoofs he had ever seen. Instead of being perpendicular the cracks around the hoofs, and were sore and bleeding. The animal could hardly bear its weight upon its distorted feet. Morris was arraigned before Justice C.H. Sherwood and pleaded guilty. He was fined $10.

For driving a wretchedly emaciated horse to an overloaded express cart, Charles Cornwall was arrested by a Special Agent of the Society. Closer examination of the animal revealed the presence of a sore on the rump under the harness, a horribly festered sore on the nigh side, and a sore on the off side. The prisoner pleaded that although he had harnessed the horse, he had not seen the sores. When arraigned before Justices Hinsdale, McKean and Wyatt, of the Court of Special Sessions, First Division, he was sentenced to pay a fine of $25, or to be imprisoned for ten days.

[7] ATTRACTED by a crowd at One Hundred and Fifty-first Street and Morris Avenue, Mr. George W. Hottemeyer and his brother crossed the street to see what was the matter. A number of Italians were gathered round a caged rat which was being shown them by Max Hopfen, a young Russian. To Mr. Hottemeyer's horrified amazement, Hopfen suddenly poured oil over the rat and struck a match to set fire to it. Mr. Hottemeyer and his brother attempted to shove Hopfen back, but the crowd resisted them, and finally Hopfen succeeded in burning the rat. Police Officer Denis J. Murphy, of the Thirty-sixth Precinct, arrested Hopfen on Mr. Hottemeyer and his brother agreeing to appear as witnesses in the case. The prisoner was taken to the Thirty-sixth precinct Police Station. He was then arraigned before City Magistrate Charles A. Flammer, of the Fifth District Court, who held him for trial by Special Sessions. The defendant pleaded not guilty, stating in his defence that he had been in this country for only four months, was ignorant of the law against cruelty to animals, and did not suppose that he was doing wrong in burning the rat. Hopfen, who is only eighteen years of age, can neither read nor write. Through an inter- *34* preter he was warned by the Court that another such act of cruelty would be severely punished. Justices Wyatt, McKean and Deuel, of the Court of Special Sessions, First Division, sentenced Hopfen to pay a fine of $15, with the alternative of five days in the City Prison. A Special Agent of the Society appeared with Mr. Hottemeyer at the trial.

For driving a very lame horse to a heavily loaded truck, Edward Stinacker, of Brooklyn, N.Y., was arrested by a Special Officer of the Society and taken to the First Police Precinct. Arraigned before City Magistrate Charles A. Flammer, of the First District court, Stinacker was held in $100 bail for trial at Special Sessions. At the trial before he had been with his employer for but three days, and had driven the horse but one day. At the time of his arrest-- 3:45 p.m.-- he had a load to deliver and one to pick up which, he said, would have compelled him to work the horse until 9 p.m. He admitted that the horse had been under treatment by a veterinary surgeon, and that when it left the stable, it was very lame. The Court sentenced him to pay a fine of $15 or to be imprisoned for three days.

By a Special Agent of the Society, William Brazill, of Long Island City, was arrested for driving a very lame horse. On examination, it was found that the animal was suffering from a quittor in the nigh front foot, which was discharging blood and pus. The prisoner was arraigned before City Magistrate Lorenz B. Zeller, of the Second District court, who held him in $500 bail for trial by Special Sessions. Brazill admitted that the horse had been laid up for more than a week, but stated in his defence that he had been ordered by the owner to drive the animal, which was not lame when it left the stable. At the trial, by Justices Olmstead, McKean and Hinsdale, of the Court of Special Sessions, First Division, the prisoner pleaded guilty and was fined $25 with the alternative of five days in the City Prison. He had been in prison since his arrest.

It frequently happens that agents of the Society risk life and limb in their efforts to rescue animals from dangerous places. At about 9 o'clock p.m., a few days ago, a horse fell into an excavation at the junction of Second Avenue, Houston and Christie streets. At the bottom of a trench twenty feet deep a large number of electrical wire crossed one another in every direction. A crowd soon gather and every individual offered his advice as to what should be done. In the course of an hour it occurred to some one to telephone to the Society, *35* and at once an agent was sent to the place. Without hesitation he entered the trench with the struggling horse, and for more than two hours he worked alone, the live wires buzzing around him, until he succeeded in putting a rope about the horse's body. That, with a sling, made it possible for the animal to be lifted by the Society's derrick to safety. Strange to say, the horse was without bodily injury, though greatly exhausted. The Society's agent was badly bruised.

[8] For severely beating a horse over the head and body with the butt of a whip, Giovanni Villotti was arrested by Special Agent of the Society at Twenty-seventh Street and Madison Avenue, and was arraigned before City Magistrate Barlow, of the Second District court, who held him in $200 bail to answer to Special Sessions. Before Justices Hinsdale, McKean and Wyatt, of the Court of Special Sessions, First Division, the prisoner pleaded guilty, stating in his defence that as he had been but three weeks in this country he did not know the laws. Justice Hinsdale told him it was long enough to get acquainted, and sentenced the main to pay a five of $25, or to be imprisoned for ten days.

[9] For carrying seven live calves crowded into a wagon only eight feet long by three wide, the calves piled one upon another, the Society's Special Agent at Highland, N.Y., arrested John McDine, a butcher, of Poughkeepsie. McDine's wagon could hold only four calves with anything like comfort. To crowd in the seven animals he had tied each one down by ropes and bound their legs. When released they were not able to stand. One was dying. The prisoner was tried by jury. He was found guilty, and was sentenced by Justice Carpenter to pay a fine of $15 and costs.

[10] The Society's Special Agent at Carthage, N.Y., investigated the case of a number of neglected horses, cattle and sheep on a farm three miles from the town. The animals were found starving. After supplying them with food and water, the agent arrested Patrick Wrape, the owner, who was arraigned before Justice P.W. Lyman. Wrape was sentenced to pay the fine of $10, or to be imprisoned for ten days.

[11] Word was received at the Sheriff's Office, Cooperstown, N.Y., that a cock fight had been arranged to take place at the Tunniecliff Inn, Richfield Springs. Deputy Sheriff Orlo J. Brown, with four of his men, raided the Inn at 2.30 a.m., capturing eighteen men and eight fighting cocks. The prisoners all pleaded guilty before Justice of the Peace James A.L Storer. They were convicted of the offence of aiding and *36* abetting a cock fight, and were sentenced to pay a fine of $10 or to ten days' imprisonment in the county jail. The cocks were confiscated by the Court to be turned over to the Society, at whose headquarters they were humanely destroyed.

The Society's Special Agent at New Rochelle, N.Y., arrested W.A. Waite, an owner of moving vans. At the time of arrest, Waite was driving a van to which a horse and a mule were attached, both animals with sores measuring two by two inches under their collars. When arraigned in the Police Court at New Rochelle, before Justice Edgar M. Phelps, Waite pleaded guilty to the charge of cruelty, and paid a fine of $10 for his offence.

[12] A case of extreme cruelty occurred at Maspeth, L.I., on May 23. Charles Liebermann was leading an old and worn-out horse from Brooklyn to Elmont, L.I., where he intended to take it to a skinner. At Maspeth, the horse was unable to go any further. A police officer, noticing its condition, advised Liebermann to have the animal destroyed. He refused to do so, but he abandoned the horse and did not return. The Society's Special Agent was notified of the case. He examined the horse, which he found weak and emaciated. On removing a bag tied around one of its feet he discovered that the hoof had fallen off. About two hours later the agent succeeded in unearthing Liebermann, and asked him what he meant to do with the horse. Liebermann replied that he was not going to stay all night with it, and was indifferent as to what became of the suffering animal. The Agent then placing him under arrest for cruelty, destroyed the horse on an abandonment permit. Liebermann was arraigned before Magistrate Luke J. Connorton, in the Second District Court, and was held in $300 bail for the Court of Special Sessions. He was tried before Magistrates Forbes, Fleming and Conolly, was found guilty, and was sentenced to fifteen days' imprisonment. He was unable to pay the fine of $20 imposed by the Court.

At Twenty-third Street and Third Avenue, Police Officer Louis Berg, of the Eighteenth Precinct, arrested Albert Seebald, a driver of an express wagon. One of the team of horses which Seebald was driving fell. On examination the officer found both horses in a very weak condition, and one lame. They were absolutely unfit for the work required of them. Seebald was taken to the Eighteenth Precinct Station House and arraigned before Magistrate Leroy B. Crane, who held him in $200 bail for the Court of Special Sessions, First Division. When brought for trial before Justices Wyatt, Deuel and McKean, the de- *39* fendant denied that the horses were in a weak condition or unfit for work. He also declared that they were not lame when they left the stable. From the evidence of a Special Agent of the Society and Officer Berg, Seebald was convicted. He was sentenced to pay a fine of $15, or to three days' imprisonment.

[13] For furiously driving a horse through the streets, endangering human life, as well as causing the animal a great deal of suffering, James Wall was arrested by a Special Agent of the Society. On examination it was found that the horse, besides being emaciated and utterly exhausted, had a sore on its breast under the collar and other small sores on its body chafed by the harness. When arraigned before Magistrate Breen, of the First District court, Wall pleaded not guilty and was held in $100 bail for trial. Before Justices Zeller, Olmsted and Deuel, of the Court of Special Sessions, First Division, the defendant withdrew his plea of not guilty and pleaded guilty. The collar, on which were blood marks where it had rested on the sore, was shown to the Court in evidence, and the defendant was sentenced to pay a fine of $10, or to three days in the City Prison.

At Yonkers, N.Y., the Society's Special Agent noticed a horse with a rag under it saddle. The animal was attached to a delivery wagon and had been left standing in front of a saloon. When the driver appeared the agent asked him if his horse had a sore back. The man said it had not, and turned sharply to drive away. At once the agent placed him under arrest and made an examination of the horse. He found a large sore under the saddle caused by the lack of a pad. When brought before Hon. William C. Kellogg, of the City Court, the driver said he was George Kannar. He claimed that he was not responsible for the condition of the horse, as the stableman where he employed had known of the sore and had sent the horse out. The Court discharged Kannar with a reprimand, and the agent arrested the stableman, James Barrett. On being brought before the Court, Barrett said that when he had sent the horse out the animal had only a pimple on its back. For the appearance of the sore it was apparent that this was untrue. Barrett was convicted of cruelty and was sentenced to pay a fine of $10, with the alternative of ten days' imprisonment in the County Jail.

For driving a lame horse attached to an express wagon, Frank Anostero was arrested by a Special Agent of the Society. The defend- *40* ant stated that he had taken the horse to a blacksmith's the day before, and the latter had treated the animal for a corn and had said the horse would not be lame. When Anostero brought the horse to New York, Galtano Fusco, the owner, instructed the driver to do that day's work, and then to keep the horse in the stable until fit for further duty. At the trial before Justices Wyatt, Olmsted and Deuel in the Court of Special Sessions, First Division, Anostero pleaded guilty. In his defence he stated that the horse was not in the condition described by the complainant, and was not lame when it left the stable. He was sentenced to pay a fine of $20, or be imprisoned for five days.

[14] From headquarters a Special Agent of the Society was sent to assist the Society's local agent in preventing cruelty to animals at the Malone (Franklin County) Fair held on September 20, 21, 22 and 23. Several days in advance of the fair a well-known citizen of Malone wrote to President Haines to call attention to its being usually an occasion of great cruelty to horses. Effectively to co-operate with the local agent at Malone, the agent from headquarters also secured the co-operation of the president of the village and of the sheriff. The entire police force of twenty men were placed by the village president at the disposal of the Society's agent. A place called "Jockey Hill," and sometimes "Jockey Lane," proved to be a rendezvous for Canadians and other visitors during the fair week at Malone to trade in old, broken-down horses. A particularly wretched and decrepit horse found there was put to death humanely by the agent. On the fair grounds a large number of horses were examined, but none seemed in bad condition. The hack drivers along the highway were inclined to drive recklessly; many had horses which the agent ordered back to the stable because they were not fit to work. On the second day of the fair, however, a number of miserable horses brought to be sold were ordered home for proper recuperation. One animal quite unfit for use was humanely destroyed by consent of the owner. An unfortunate old horse was found by the police abandoned about a mile from the fair grounds. After some trouble the owner was unearthed and was immediately arrested on the charge of abandoning a sick horse on the public highway. Still other cases of abandoned horses were looked into and the owners arrested. Many warnings were given the hackmen, horse dealers and jockeys. The Society's agents were thanked by the law-abiding citizens of Malone, who declared that never in the history of the Annual Fair of the Franklin County Agricultural Society had there been so little cruelty practice on the animals. *41*

The Society sent one of its Special Agents to the fair at White Plains from September 27 to October 1. The agent warned the hackmen that he would instantly arrest any one whom he found over-driving or in any way abusing his horse. While on the road to the fair he examined a number of hack horses. On the fair grounds he found some dog kennels badly constructed, and he suggested to the manager than the dogs should be removed to more comfortable and sanitary quarters, which was done. Some of the poultry were exhibited in coops far too small and at the agent's instigation were removed into proper shelter. A blind peddler of pencils had a poodle carrying a basket in its mouth. On being told that the dog had been holding the basket for three hours, the agent had the animal's master take it from him, and warned him not to give it again to the dog. Some minor abuses in frightening animals were promptly brought to an end. It was not found necessary to make arrests.

Michael Ambinder, fourteen years of age, was arrested by Police Officer Ira B. Baird for driving a weak horse. The Society's Special Agent examined the horse at the Seventy-second Precinct in Parkville in the presence of Roundsman Hatton, who holds the Society's medal for making the greatest number of arrests for cruelty to animals in Brooklyn. The horse was found in fair condition. The agent then saw the father of the boy, Samuel Ambinder, who stated that he had gone to market with his son and also had ridden in the wagon within a mile or two of their home. Having other business to transact, the elder Ambinder went in another direction and allowed the boy to drive the horse alone. Arraigned before Justice John Fitzgerald, of the Children's Court, the child was paroled by the Justice. At the trial he was found guilty and was fined $5.

[15] A resident of Avon, N.Y., was arrested by the Society's local agent for carrying several calves in a cruel and inhuman manner, with the forelegs tied close to the head. When the cords were cut the poor creatures could hardly stand up. Defendant demanded a trial by jury, who disagreed, standing five for acquittal. In this case the defendant was a popular and influential farmer, a resident of the town, and the jury was comprised mostly of neighboring farmers.

[16] The Society's agent at Carthage, N.Y., reports: "I had received several complaints that the horses, cattle and sheep belonging to P---- W----, of Wilna, on his farm, about three miles from Carthage, were entirely without food. I went to the place and found the animals actually starving and not a particle of food of any kind on the premises. *42* After providing food and drink for the cattle, I arrested W---- and arraigned him before the Justice of Peace, on the charge of cruelty to animals." Defendant plead guilty and was sentenced to pay a fine of $10.

Special Agent Potter, of the Society, at Ellenville, was informed that three cows and one colt could be found in an old, tumbled-down barn, with little or not protection from the weather and nothing to eat. Agent Potter found the conditions as described and after providing proper food for the animals he arrested the owner, who was found guilty and sentenced to Ulster County Jail for three months by Justice of Peace Fitzgerald.

E---- P----, of Christian Hill, N.Y., was charged with neglecting to provide proper shelter, food and drink for his horses and other live stock. Our Special Agent reported that "the hay was uncut and the live stock unfed with a view of saving expenses." The agent had advised and repeatedly warned the offender that he would be arrested if a change for the better was not made, and the barn repaired in order to keep the live stock from freezing during the cold weather. This P---- neglected to do and was arrested, tried and convicted and sentenced to pay a fine of $25; also warned that a repetition of the offense would bring about a much more severe punishment.

One of our agents was informed that J---- B---- had rented a farm to be worked on shares. On the farm were 14 cows, 3 yearlings and 1 pig, which were all in good condition at the time of taking possession, but when found by the agent they showed every evidence of neglect. Nothing but frozen cornstalks and straw was found on the premises, although there was plenty of feed in the barn, which J---- B---- refused to give to the cattle, until all the frozen stalks and straw had been consumed. One of the yearlings had died, one cow had to be killed. The other animals had eaten off the limbs of trees and were staggering, for the want of food, about the field. J---- B---- was arrested and charged with failing to provide proper and sufficient sustenance for the animals. The case was a clear one and the defendant should have been severely punished, but a fine of $15 was imposed. *135*



Prior to the enactment of the statute entitled "An Act to Prevent the Cruel and Improper Treatment of Cattle," introduced in England in July, 1822, by the late highly esteemed Mr. Martin, the general treatment of animals in all countries of the world was inhuman. (1) "Whether from ignorance, thoughtlessness, heedlessness, or wanton brutality, animals were subjected to extreme pain and torture, and their condition failed to excite the commiseration of the public. The best classes of society contained a few persons only who openly protested against this cruelty, while the majority were engaged in divers pastimes that caused much animal suffering, and regarded with scorn and indignation any appeal made to them in favor of the brutes. Naturally, the lower and lowest orders were therefore more or less insensible from their betters, they also indulged in cruel sports and maintained a right in man to behave toward dumb domestic dependents as he pleased. In fact, the protests of humane people were silenced by ridicule which came from the platform, the pulpit, and the senate, as well as from the galled pens of satirists.

"No better instance can be quoted of the prevailing indifference of men in even the highest social position to the feelings of animals than the mocking treatment of the Peers when Lord Erskine stood up in the House of Lords, in the early *136* part of the present century (1811), to ask for justice to the lower creatures of God. Insensible alike to his moderate demands and appeals for compassion and mercy to all defenceless animals that man had pressed into his service, the chamber broke out into open derision when he argued in favor of their rights to humane treatment. It is said that loud jeers, vulgar ejaculations, indecorous demeanor, and even whistling and cock-crowing were practically the only reply given to the grand speech of this high-souled man. No wonder, therefore, that the man in the street ridiculed also, and that callous coachmen and other persons vented their unrestrained passions on animals without let or hindrance. The public records of eighty years ago certainly do show that the friends of the brutes were fear and their foes many and cruel.

"The most reckless and savage punishment, and the most disgusting disregard to the bodily sufferings of animals, were exhibited unconcealed in the highways and streets daily; festering sores, discharging wounds, excruciating lameness, and totering infirmity called not forth modern devices to evade public reprobation, and without disguise the lash and goad worked their bloody inflictions. The uncombined efforts of a few benevolent individuals were no check to these evils; and hence it became necessary to establish a society which should unite the friends of dumb animal creatures.

"The founders of this Society met on the 16th of June, 1824, and inaugurated the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, appointed a committee, and conceived the following plan of operations:

10. The circulation of suitable tracts gratuitously, or by cheap sale, particularly among persons intrusted with cattle, such as coachmen, carters, and drovers.

11. The introduction into schools of books calculated to impress on youth the duty of humanity to inferior animals.

12. Frequent appeals to the public through the press, awakening more general attention to a subject so interesting, though too much neglected. *137*

13. The periodical delivery of discourses from the pulpit.

14. The employment of constables in the markets and streets; and

15. The prosecution of persons of flagrant acts of cruelty, with publicity to the proceedings, and announcement of results.

Steadily working by the above means, bravely bearing contumely and overcoming difficulties, the founders became stronger year after year: subscribers and co-workers gradually joined their ranks; and a marked improvement slowly manifested itself in the treatment of animals. Then followed the distinguished patronage of Her Most Gracious Majesty the Queen, Her Royal Highness the late Duchess of Kent, the nobility, and many distinguished Members of both Houses of Parliament; and in 1840, by command of Her Majesty, the Society was honored with the prefix of `Royal.' Since that period its progress has been regular, and its achievements encouraging, and now it is regarded as a permanently established institution, which has outlived ridicule, and secured for founders the esteem of good and practical men of this and succeeding generations.

During many years the committee advocated the removal and enlargement of Smithfield Market. Owing to its agency, bull-baiting, bull-running, cock-fighting, badger-baiting, and other wicked sports of a barbarous age have been prohibited by legal enactments. In 1835 the Society obtained an amendment of Martin's Act; in 1845 an amendment of the law for regulating Knackers' Yards; in 1849 a new and much improved Act for the more effectual Prevention of Cruelty to Animals; and in 1854 an Act prohibiting the use of dogs as beasts of draft or burden throughout England; and recently many other Acts of Parliament."

The first society organized in America for the protection of animals was The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, its founder and first president being the late Henry Bergh, to whose noble self-sacrifices and untiring energies the cause of animal protection in this country owes *138* its origin. The history of the Society, therefore, is practically an account of the inception and development of the work of animal protection in America.

In 1862 Mr. Bergh was appointed Secretary of Legation at St. Petersburg. While in Russia he found himself on several occasions constrained to interfere in cases of atrocious cruelty, and but for his official position he would have been exposed to personal violence. His attention was thus directed to the subject of humanity to the brute creation and while in London on his way home in 1865, he made the acquaintance of John Colam, Esq., Secretary of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, who gave him much valuable information concerning the operations of that Society in England. On Mr. Begh's arrival at home, he found that no similar society existed in this country, and he immediately devoted himself to the establishment of a society for the United States. At the outset the propostionment with little encouragement, and, without the assistance of the press, it might probably have failed. On February 8, 1866, Mr. Bergh delivered a lecture in Clinton Hall, in which he pleaded his cause with such force of argument and such warmth of eloquent conviction, that expressions of sympathy and offers of assistance were freely made by persons in attendance. The press then lent its powerful aid; the lecture was published in whole or in part in all the great cities of the country; public sentiment in favor of Mr. Bergh's movement was quickly aroused, and on April 10, 1866, "The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals" was incorporated by the Legislature of the State of New York. Among the original charter members of the Society were many of the most eminent citizens of the City and State of New York.

On the 19th of April, in the same year, Mr. Bergh secured the passage by the Legislature of New York of the first law ever enacted in this country for the protection of animals. It provided that "every person who shall, by his act or neglect, maliciously kill, maim, wound, injure, torture, or cruelly beat *139* any horse, mule, cow, cattle, sheep, or other animal belonging to himself or another, shall, upon conviction, be adjudged guilty of a misdemeanor." [For analysis of early legislation see _____]

On the 22d of April a meeting was held in Clinton Hall for the purpose of effecting a permanent organization, and at that meeting the first society for the protection of animals in this country came into active existence. The purpose of the association, as set forth in its constitution, was "to provide effective means for the prevention of cruelty to animals throughout the United States, to enforce all laws which then were or might hereafter be enacted for the protection of animals, and to secure, by lawful means, the arrest and conviction of all persons found violating such laws." As a matter of fact, the only law of that kind then to be found on the statute books of the State of the Union was that which had been passed by the legislature of New York nine days after the incorporation of the Society. Within twelve months, however, another "act for the more effectual prevention of cruelty to animals" was passed by the Legislature of the same State; and from time to time additions have been made to it, so that there is now hardly a phase of cruelty which the Society has not the legal power to prevent within the boundaries of the State of New York. The legal definition of the word "animal" now includes every living creature except members of the human race, and the words "torture" and "cruelty" include every act, omission, or neglect whereby unjustifiable physical pain, suffering, or death is caused or permitted.



The organization and influence of the American Society soon led to the establishment of local societies in all parts of the Union and in other countries on the American Continent and elsewhere. The number of local societies incorporated in *140* the United States is now 238, and in other American nations, 21 societies have been established and incorporated since 1866, making a total of 259.

The prevention of cruelty to animals has been the beginning of many other humane organizations. Thus, in 1874, the Society appeared as prosecutor in a case of cruelty to children, and it then appeared to be advisable to organize a separate Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children. This was done in 1875, under the Presidency of Mr. John D. Wright; Mr. Henry Bergh becoming Vice-President of the new society, the first of its kind in the world, which has done so much and such effectively good work in the last thirty years.

The establishment of these and other organizations have represented an increased interest in humane work which has found a practical expression in the legislation of nearly every State in the Union. At this date there is not a single State in which cruelty of any kind is not forbidden by the law, under stringent penalties for disobedience. Some defects continue to exist, of course; but speaking broadly, it may be said that the laws on this subject are good. What is now required is that the great mass of the people shall be educated into sympathy with the humanity of the law. That is now the greater work of the Society, and it has constant reason to be grateful for the assistance and encouragement which it receives from the press, the pulpit, and the judges of the courts.

The abuses growing out of the then prevailing systems of dog catching and impounding having become so flagrant as to demand immediate checking, a bill, entitled "An Act for the better protection of lost and strayed animals, and for securing the rights of the owners thereof," was prepared by the President of the Society and introduced into the Legislature of 1894, providing for the abolishment of the city dog pound, and empowering the Society to carry out the provisions of the act. This bill became a law on March 8, 1894 (Chap. 115, Laws 1894), and the Society immediately thereupon commenced the erection of a Shelter for Animals at 102d Street *141* and East River, provided with every accommodation for the care of animals and their humane destruction.

In rescuing the community from the reign of the old dog catchers, the Society earned the gratitude of dog owners of New York, and in 1895, at the request of the Mayor of Brooklyn, the law was amended (Chap. 412, Laws 1895) so as to include that city as well. A Shelter was then established in that city, at the corner of Malbone Street and Nostrand Avenue, and when Staten Island became a part of the greater City of New York, a Shelter was also opened on Wave Street, Stapleton, Borough of Richmond.

Much suffering has thus been spared the vagrant, lost, and abandoned dogs and cats of the city. Unwanted animals are no longer thrown into the streets, to suffer and die of exposure and starvation, but are given into the care of the Society and by it mercifully destroyed or placed in good homes.

Through the generosity of kind-hearted people interested in the work of animal protection, the Society was enabled, in 1896-97, to rear a commodious fireproof building as its permanent Headquarters, adequate to the increased needs of the Society, and supplied with every facility for carrying on the work to the best advantage.

Meanwhile the practical work is not neglected. The officers of the Society are clothed with ample police powers. They wear a distinctive uniform and patrol the streets by day and night. They have full power to arrest and prosecute offenders against the laws relating to animals. In addition to the uniformed police, the Society has over two hundred special agents in different parts of the State, clothed with the same authority and engaged in enforcing the laws for the prevention of cruelty. In the Boroughs of Manhattan and Brooklyn the Society has ambulances for the removal of injured, since, and disabled animals which have fallen into excavations and a patrol wagon which carries with it the necessary apparatus and medicines for rendering aid to injured animals in the streets. *142*

In addition to its permanent headquarters, Madison Avenue and 26th Street, and the Shelters above mentioned, the Society maintains an ambulance house at 111 East 22d Street, New York, and an office at 13 Willoughby Street, and an ambulance house at 114 Lawrence Street, Brooklyn. In the greater City of New York it maintains a uniformed force of twenty-two salaried Special Agents, and in other parts of the State of New York it has over two hundred volunteer agents.

In the prosecution of its work, the Society has in constant use three large ambulances especially constructed for the removal of sick, injured and homeless small animals. Twenty horses and a large corps of men are employed in this service.

The official organ of the Society is OUR ANIMAL FRIENDS, a monthly magazine which is devoted to the cause of humanity to all living creatures, and which has an extensive and growing circulation. *143*




In re The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals.

The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals was incorporated by Chapter 469 of the Laws of the State of New York, passed April 10, 1866. The charter was procured mainly through the efforts of Mr. Bergh, also the founder of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children. He devoted many years of his life to the humane work which the societies were organized to promote. The Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals was the pioneer organization of this kind in America, and is the parent of the local organizations in this State established in many counties to carry on similar work in their respective localities. The local societies are not created by special charter as is The American Society, but under a general law, and the general statute for the incorporation of such societies requires as a prerequisite to their corporate existence that the proposed corporation shall obtain the approval of The American Society to the incorporation, or, if such approval is withheld, the sanction of a Judge of the Supreme Court. (Chapter 490, Laws of 1888; Chapter 291, Laws of 1892; Membership Corporations Law, Chapter 559, *144* Laws of 1895, Section 79.) This legislation recognizes the primacy of The American Society. The Charter Act of 1866 does not undertake to define with precision the powers to be exercised by The American Society. But by Section 5 it empowers the Society to enact a code of by-laws for the regulation and management of its affairs not inconsistent with the laws of the State or of the United States, which, when enacted, are to have the force of law. The Society, under this authority, enacted by-laws, the second of which declares the objects of the Society, viz.: "To provide effective means for the prevention of cruelty to animals throughout the United States; to enforce all laws which are now, or may hereafter be, enacted for the protection of animals; and to secure by lawful means the arrest, conviction, and punishment of all persons violating such laws," etc. It will be noticed that the enforcement of criminal laws relating to cruelty to animals is one of the objects specified. Speaking of The American Society, Judge Earl said, in Davis vs. The American Society (75 N.Y., 362, 366): "The purpose of the corporation was to enforce the laws enacted to prevent cruelty to animals." The American Society after its incorporation actively entered upon the work for which it was incorporated, and the change wrought in public sentiment and in the treatment of dumb animals, replacing cruelty by kindness patent to every observer, is due largely to the work of The American Society. The original charter of the Society was enacted solely for the protection of animals. The protection of individuals and the public against wandering, diseased and dangerous animals, especially dogs left to run at large upon the streets without apparent ownership and uncared for, feeding upon the filthy and often poisonous refuse of the cesspool and the gutter, was not embraced within the original purpose of the charter. In the City of New York and elsewhere this subject had been left to municipal regulation, which had proved ineffective to meet and prevent the discomfort and danger referred to. To meet this exigency the Legislature passed the Act, Chapter 115 of the Laws of 1894, prescribing a system *145* for the licensing of dogs in cities of over 800,000 population (practically in the City of New York), the administration and supervision of which was committed to The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. Section II of the Act repeals the authority conferred upon the Common Council of the City of New York by Sub-section 30 of Section 86 of the Consolidation Act of 1882, to enact ordinances "relative to the taxing and destroying of dogs within the said city." The repealing clause in the Act of 1894 shows that it was the intention of the Legislature to substitute the system established by that Act and the control vested in The American Society in respect to dogs in the City of New York in place of the authority therefore vested in the Common Council. The Act of 1894 was amended by Chapter 412 of the Laws of 1895, and by Chapter 495 of the Laws of 1902, and the existing system is now embraced in the last-named statute. The leading features of the Act of 1902 may be briefly summarized. The Act requires every owner of a dog in the City of New York to take out an animal license and prescribe the license fee. Each licensed dog is to wear a collar around its neck, with a metal tag attached bearing the number of the license. It is provided that dogs not licensed shall be seized, and if not claimed and redeemed within forty-either hours, may be destroyed; and if not claimed and redeemed within five days after the seizure, "they shall then be destroyed." Any cat found without a collar about its neck bearing the name and residence of the owner "may be seized and disposed of in like manner as prescribed about for dogs." The power to issue licenses, to collect the license fees, to furnish tags, and generally to carry out the provisions of the Act is vested in The American Society. Section 8 is as follows: "The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals is hereby empowered and authorized to carry out the provisions of this Act, and the said Society is further authorized to issue the licenses and renewals, and to collect the fees therefor, as herein prescribed; and the fees so collected shall be applied by said Society in defraying *146* the cost of carrying out the provisions of this Act and maintaining a shelter for lost, strayed, or homeless animals and any fees so collected and not required in carrying out the provisions of this Act shall be retained by the said Society as compensation for enforcing the provisions of title sixteen of the Penal Code, and such other statutes of the State as relate to the humane work in which the said Society is engaged." The reason for the last provision in this section, that the Society shall retain the license fees not required for the other specified services as compensation for enforcing the provisions of Title XVI of the Penal Code, is found in the nature of those provisions and the work of the Society in aiding in their enforcement. That title of the Penal Code is entitled "Cruelty to Animals," embracing Sections 655 to 669, inclusive. They cover not only the cases of cruelty to animals, but other offenses against good order and affecting the public welfare connected with their improper use. Among other things they make over-driving, abandonment of diseased animals, the failure to provide animals with proper food and drink, wantonly poisoning them, cock-fighting and other similar sports, and the keeping of cows in unhealthy places and the selling of impure milk, misdemeanors. The Penal Code has been supplemented by many other statutory provisions which relate more or less directly to the work of societies for the prevention of cruelty to animals. (See Society Manual.) Section 668 of Title XVI of the Penal Code expresses the legislative intention as to the relation of The American Society to the execution of the provisions of that title. It provides that the fines and penalties for a violation of the provisions of the title shall be paid over to The American Society, except where the prosecution is initiated and conducted by other societies for the prevention of cruelty to animals. It authorizes any agent or officer of the Society to "arrest and bring before a court or magistrate having jurisdiction, any person offending against its provisions, and to interfere to prevent the perpetration of any act of cruelty upon any animal in his presence." It provides that any of the societies may *147* prefer complaints before any court or magistrate having jurisdiction, "and may aid in presenting the law or the facts before such court, tribunal or magistrate in any proceding taken." The section concludes, "The officers and agents of all duly incorporated societies for prevention of cruelty to animals or children are hereby declared to be peace officers within the provisions of Section one hundred and fifty-four of the Code of Criminal Procedure." The work of The American Society in aiding the enforcement of the Penal Code in respect to cruelty to animals, the suppression of cock-fighting, the protection of the public against impure milk, and the suppression of other illegal practices, has been vigorously pursued. The Society through its officers and agents, as shown by its records, has aided in the prosecution of thousands of offenses against the Penal Code and other statutory enactments for the protection of animals. Such prosecutions have resulted in convictions for violations of these statutes under every section of Title XVI of the Penal Code, and its beneficent work has secured has secured the hearty cooperation of the public authorities in the City of New York. Under the dog-licensing act its work has been of the greatest public utility. During the first five and a half years after the passage of Chapter 115 of the Laws of 1894, 164,226 dogs and 315,645 cats, roaming at large in violation of the Act, were seized in the City of New York and taken to the shelter. In the year 1899 more than 25,000 dogs and 56,000 cats were seized under the authority of the Act, and larger numbers in each year thereafter. The Society at great expense has provided shelters for the retention of lost, strayed and homeless animals, and for dogs and cats seized and held for reclamation by the owners, or if not reclaimed pending the time for their destruction. It maintains an ambulance service and agents employed by day and night in the performance of duties connected with the work of the Society.

In view of the Fox case hereinafter referred to[,] the question has been raised as to whether the Act of 1902 is subject to any constitutional objection. *148*

The regulation of the care of dogs and other animals in the interest of public security is unquestionably within the competency of the Legislature. It belongs to that great mass of legislation enacted under what is known as the police power of the State. The general purpose of the Act, Chapter 115 of the Laws of 1894 as amended by Chapter 495 of the Laws of 1902, creating a license system for dogs, is plainly in the interest and for the protection of the people of the city of New York. It is not a tax or revenue act. The requirement that owners of dogs shall take out a license is to secure their proper care and oversight, and the license fee required to be paid is incident to the carrying out of this purpose and to provide means for its execution. The Legislature, in the exercise of its discretion to provide suitable means for the enforcement of its policy, has by the Act designated The American Society as the administrative agency for carrying out the license system. There would seem to be no ground to question the legislative power in this respect. It is to be observed that no legislative power and no discretion is vested in the officers or agents of the Society. The Legislature itself determines that a license shall in all cases be obtained. It fixes the license fee. It enacts the consequences which shall follow a disregard of the law. The Society has no discretion to withhold a license in any case. In issuing licenses, supplying the tags, maintaining a shelter, seizing unlicensed dogs, and destroying them unless reclaimed within the time specified, the Society plainly acts as the agent of the State, and exercises delegated, administrative and executive functions only. In considering whether the Legislature may vest these administrative powers in The American Society, the nature of the corporation known as The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals is worthy of consideration. The Legislature created the corporation by special act. It named the incorporators. It was on its initiative that the corporation was called into existence. Unlike corporations formed under general laws by the voluntary action of individuals, the Legislature simply authorizing their crea- *149* tion, The American Society is the direct creation of the Legislature itself, created because in its judgment it supplied a needed agency for the protection of animals. The additional powers engrafted on the original charter by the Act of 1894 extended the work of the Society so as to embrace the protection of the public against animals roaming at will without care and constituting a menace to public safety. In the general classification of corporations as public and private The American Society may technically fall within the last category. But in its essential character and objects it was created for public purposes. It subserves no private interests. Its duties and powers relate exclusively to matters which have always been deemed suitable for public regulation. There are no stockholders, and the whole revenue of the Society from licenses must be applied in defraying necessary expenses in the employment of agents and providing the necessary incidentals for its work, and to promoting the objects of the incorporation. It is a quasi corporation, a term which marks the distinction between strictly private corporations and those which, technically private, are organized for public objects. (7, Am. and Eng. Enc. of Law, page 638, and cases cited.) The Society is a subordinate public agency to perform a service which the Legislature might delegate to a citizen or public body.

The only doubt as to the validity of the Act of 1902 is based on the case of Fox vs. The Mohawk and Hudson River Humane Society (165 N.Y. 517). The defendant in that case was created by the consolidation under Chapter 292 of the Laws of 1894 of two existing voluntary corporations organized under general laws, one for the prevention of cruelty to children, and one for the prevention of cruelty to animals. By Chapter 448 of the Laws of 1896 the general system for the licensing of dogs engrafted on the powers of The American Society by the original Act of 1894 was applied to the other incorporated societies for the prevention of cruelty to animals. The Mohawk and Hudson River Humane Society, incorporated in the County of Albany, in the execution of the *150* power conferred by the Act of 1896, was about to seize an unlicensed dog, and out of this the litigation in the Fox case originated. The plaintiff alleged that the Act was unconstitutional, and so it was finally adjudged by the Court of Appeals upon two grounds: First , that the fifth section of the Act which declared that "dogs not redeemed within forty-eight hours (after seizure) may be destroyed or otherwise disposed of at the discretion of the Society" in effect permitted the Society to harbor dogs without obtaining a license, as every other citizen was required to do, and that this was the grant of an exclusive privilege or immunity forbidden by Section 18 of Article III of the State Constitution; and, second , that the seventh section of the Act, so far as it required the owner of a dog to pay a license fee to the defendant "for its own purposes" was a gift of public money in contravention of Section 9 of Article VIII of the Constitution. In considering the application of the Fox case to the powers conferred by the Act of 1902 on The American Society it is important to notice that the case is a decisive authority that the Legislature could lawfully constitute societies for the prevention of cruelty to animals a public agency to execute the licensing system established by the Act of 1896 and by the Act of 1902, and that the power conferred upon the agents of the societies summarily to seize and destroy unlicensed dogs was not repugnant to that clause in the Constitution which protects property against invasion without due process of law. The qualified character of property in dogs was held to distinguish it from other property, and that due process of law was exerted when the Legislature, under the police power, authorized the seizure and destruction of unlicensed dogs by the defendant Society.

The Constitutional objection raised by the Court of Appeals in the Fox case, based upon the construction of the fifth section of Chapter 448 of the Laws of 1896, has been eliminated as to The American Society by the amendment of the fifth section of Chapter 115 of the Laws of 1894 by the Act of 1902. The original section five in the two Acts of 1894 and *151* 1896 were in identical language. The Court of Appeals held that it permitted the Society to harbor unlicensed dogs and keep them at its pleasure without obtaining a license. This the could held was the grant of an exclusive privilege in contravention of the Constitution. The Court said: "The defendant can keep any dog it sees fit and is not required to pay anything for the privilege. No one else in the community can keep a dog without paying a dollar a year for the privilege . . . . We think this an exclusive privilege condemned by the Constitution." Again on page 526 the opinion, after stating that under the Act then in question the Society was not required to kill unlicensed dogs, proceeds: "It is contended that the statute was enacted to exterminate homeless, wandering or diseased dogs, which may be a source of great danger to life and health. If the statute prescribed action appropriate to effect such result the work directed to be done in pursuance of it might be well termed governmental and a very different question presented." The fifth section of the Act of 1894, was amended by the fifth section of the Act of 1902, completely removes the objection of special privilege, and that the work of the Society is not governmental. It makes it imperative on The American Society to destroy all unlicensed dogs seized after the temporary detention permitted to give opportunity for their reclamation. The Society cannot harbor them within the meaning of the statute nor keep a kennel nor sell them. They are irrevocably devoted to destruction unless reclaimed within the brief period allowed by the owner. The language of the amended section is: "Section 5.--Dogs not licensed pursuant to the provision of this Act shall be seized, and if not claimed and redeemed within forty-eight hours thereafter they may be destroyed; but if not claimed and redeemed or destroyed within five days of the time of seizure they shall then be destroyed." It is clear that the constitutional objection founded on Section 18, Article III of the Constitution made to the Act in the Fox case has no application to the Act of 1902. *152*

The provision in the Act of 1902 that the license fees collected by The American Society" shall be applied by said Society in defraying the cost of carrying out the provisions of this Act and maintaining a shelter for lost, strayed, or homeless animals and any fees so collected and not required in carrying out the provisions of this Act shall be retained by the said Society as compensation for enforcing the provisions of Title Sixteen of the Penal Code and such other statutes of the State as relate to the humane work in which said Society is engaged," is not a gift of public money forbidden by the Constitution..

The clause of the Constitution bearing upon this question is Section 9 of Article VIII, which declares: "Neither the credit nor the money of the State shall be given or loaned to or in aid of any association, corporation, or private undertaking. This section shall not, however, prevent the Legislature from making such provision for the education and support of the blind, the deaf and dumb, and juvenile delinquents, as to it may seem proper," etc. The design of this section and of the tenth section, imposing a similar prohibition on cites, towns, and villages, was to interpose a barrier to the practice which had grown up in legislative bodies to appropriate public moneys or to loan the public credit in aid of private enterprises on the plea of assumed public utility. The bestowing by the Legislature of public money as gratuities to corporations or individuals was prohibited by the ninth section and nothing beyond. An appropriation by the Legislature of public money, unless it amounts to a gift to the corporation or individual designated as the recipient, is not within the prohibition. The prohibitory words: "Neither the credit nor the money of the State shall be given," admit of no other interpretation. It may very well be that an appropriation by the Legislature of public money under the guise of a contract would be a gift within Section 9, Article VIII of the Constitution provided the contract was not one which the State was authorized to make. But where no evasion is attempted and the appropriation is not made as a *153* gratuity, but is founded upon a consideration which the Legislature may lawfully recognize, it is not condemned by this section. If invalid its invalidity must be found in some other prohibition or provision of the Constitution. The substantial answer to the constitutional objection raised under Section 9, Article VIII is that the provision in Section 8 of the Law of 1902 is not, in terms or in substance, a gift of money to The American Society. This provision devotes the license fees to defraying the expense of executing the police policy of the State in respect to the licensing system established by the Act of 1902, and of enforcing the criminal statutes relating to cruelty to animals and other cognate subjects. The work done by the Society in respect to these matters has been referred to, and its importance and the efficiency of the Society as the recognized agency to secure the enforcement of these statutes is known and acknowledged. The discharge of the duties intrusted to The American Society involves large expenditures in carrying on the organization, employing agents, maintaining a shelter for the temporary detention of animals, maintaining an ambulance system, and other similar purposes. There can, we conceive, be no question that the Legislature could property charge the expense of executing the license system and the compensation of its agents in aiding in the enforcement of the provisions of Title XVI of the Penal Code upon the license fund. This is all that was done by Section 8 of the Act of 1902. Payments by the State for these purposes is in an accurate sense a discharge of the obligations of the State incurred in the administration of its police power. Compensation made by the State to an individual or to a corporate body for public service rendered at its instance is neither in form nor substance a gift of the public money. The clause in Section 9 of Article VIII of the Constitution following the prohibitory words, viz.: "This section shall not, however, prevent the Legislature from making such provision for the education and support of the blind, the deaf and dumb, and juve- *154* nile delinquents, as to it may seem proper," do not justify an inference that compensation made by the State for services rendered by private corporations or individuals in the execution of police regulations are gifts of public money. It will be noted that this clause is not put in the form of any exception to the preceding prohibition. Obviously payments by the State for the education and support of dependent classes made to private corporations which undertake, at the instance of the State, the performance of duties recognized as public, and which the State in justice ought to assume, are not in any proper sense gifts. It is not, however, difficult to conceive cases where forms of State aid to private corporations engaged in the relief of the blind, the deaf and dumb, etc., might be regarded as gifts instead of provisions for education and support. The framers of the Constitution designed to give a free hand to the Legislature in providing for the objects specified in this clause. The clause was evidently inserted out of extreme caution so as to preclude any construction which would hamper the State in providing for this beneficent work. It does not tend to show that compensation by the State to private corporations for public service is a gift of public money within the prohibition. The statute under consideration in the Fox case (Chapter 448, Laws of 1896), provided (Section 7) that the license fees collected by the societies, of which the Mohawk and Hudson River Humane Society was one, should be used by the societies in defraying the expenses incurred in carrying out the act "and" maintaining a shelter for lost animals, etc., "and,." this section concludes, "for its own purposes." It was upon these concluding words that Judge Cullen based his opinion that the section violated the prohibition in the Construction against gifts of public money to private corporations. After negativing the grounds upon which the Appellate Division rested its decision, Judge Cullen said: "We think, however, that the statute is unconstitutional so far as it requires the owner of a dog to pay a license fee to the defendant for its own use." The authority *155* given to the Society to retain the license fees and apply them to "its own purposes," which embrace not only the protection of animals but of children also again cruelty, was the turning point on that branch of the case. The money was not given to the Society as compensation, and it could be used at the discretion of the Society for purposes not germane to the source from which it was derived. The Act now governing The American Society (Chapter 495 of the Laws of 1902) differs in an essential and vital point from the Act under consideration in the Fox case. The money remaining, if any, after paying expenses of carrying out the license system and maintaining a shelter is to be retained by The American Society under the Law of 1902 (Section 8) "as compensation" for enforcing the provisions of Title XVI of the Penal Code and other similar statutes. The right to make such compensation is, in my judgment, undoubted, and while the amount authorized to be retained is quite inadequate to the development of the constantly broadening work of the Society, the amount of the compensation to be made, if compensation can be made at all, is a legislative and not a judicial question. Upon the whole I am of opinion that the disposition of the license fees made by the Act of 1902 is not in conflict with Section 9, Article VIII of the Constitution, and that the Fox case may and ought to be distinguished on this point from a case arising under that Act.

In respect to the suggestion that the Act of 1902 attempts to confer on The American Society the power to appoint public officers in the authority to appoint officers and agents, who, when appointed, are vested with official functions, is answered in the main by the decision of the Court of Appeals in the Fox case, which expressly overruled the opinion of the Appellate Division that the Act of 1896, wich conferred power upon the officers and agents of The American Society, was unconstitutional in that it assumed to vest in the defendant the execution of certain *156* police powers of the State, and in effect constituted it a public officer. "The decision below," said the Court of Appeals, "cannot be upheld on this ground." The only new question upon this branch of the case arises as to the validity of the provision in Section 668 of the Penal Code, which authorizes any agent or office of The American Society to arrest and bring before the court or magistrate having jurisdiction any person offending against the provisions of Title XVI of the Penal Code, and the provision in the same section which declares that the "officers and agents are hereby declared to be peace officers within the provisions of Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure." It has been decided that the Legislature may authorize arrests by officers without warrant for misdemeanors admitted in their presence other than such as amount to breaches of the peace (Burrows vs. Eastman, 101 Mich. 419), and in this State this power exists without special legislative authority (17 How. Pr. 101. See also Stage Horse cases, 15 Abb. Pr., N.S. 62). At common law a private person may arrest for felony actually committed on reasonable grounds of suspicion (Burns vs. Erben, 40 N.Y. 463), and may arrest for an affray or breach of the peace committed in his presence, but must, without unreasonable delay, bring the offender before a magistrate. (Jordan vs. Reardon, 16 Minn. 431; 2 Am. And Eng. Enc. Law, 2d Ed., p. 888, and cases cited.) The Legislature may also extend the power of private persons to make arrests for offenses committed in their presence so as to embrace misdemeanors of any kind, accompanied with the condition that the offenders be brought without delay before a proper magistrate. This was what was done in respect to officers and agents of The American Society as to offenses under Title XVI of the Penal Code. The provision constituting such officers and agents peace officers simply means that they shall have the powers of peace officers in respect to the offenses specified in Section 668. I am of the opinion that the Legislature did not overstep its authority in conferring the powers mentioned. *157* Even if it were otherwise the general scheme of the Act of 1902 would not be affected. These provisions which are separable would fall, and the powers of the officers and agents of The American Society in other respects would continue.


December, 1902. *158*



An erroneous idea is entertained by many that this Society is beyond the necessity for further appeals to our benevolent and generous-hearted people for aid. It receives no appropriations from the city or State, and is dependent upon voluntary subscriptions, donation, and bequests. The usefulness of the organization could be largely increased, and the field of the labors greatly extended, if it had a more adequate pecuniary support. As all know, the objects of the Society are to enforce the humane laws, to investigate complaints, to care for lost or abandoned animals, or to destroy them mercifully, to suppress cruel beating, overloading, and over-driving, and to protect and assist sick, maimed, and starving animals.

Another prominent object of the Society is the distribution of humane literature, out of which shall grow not only the kind of treatment of animals, but the higher elevation of our own race. It may be desirable to state in this connection that during the past year the Society has published and distributed many millions of pages of printed matter in the interest of humanity in animals, and we have had ample reason to know that the effect has been fully as great as could have been reasonably hoped for this purpose and to these ends we earnestly invite your pecuniary assistance.

The library of the Society contains many valuable books relating to the brute creation. Contributions of works treating of animal life are urgently requested. The library is of great importance and value to the Society in aiding it to carry on the educational feature which now so largely enters into the work of animal protection.

Contributions to the Society will be acknowledged in the annual report. *159*



In addition to the monthly magazine of the Society, OUR ANIMAL FRIENDS, and the manual, "Kindness to Animals," referred to in another part of this report, the Society publishes a number of leaflets, among which the following may be mentioned;

No. 1--"Ten Rules for the Treatment of Animals." Gives valuable hints in regard to the treatment conducive to the good health and happiness of animals.

No. 2.--"What is Docking?" Points out the absurdities of the practice, and cites the opinions of the best authorities proving the cruelty of the operation.

No. 3.--"Fashion's Cruelty and Bird Protection." An able plea by J.A. Allen, Ph.D., for the preservation of bird life, now so wantonly and cruelly sacrificed in the interest of vain fashion.

No. 4.--"The Dishorning of Cattle an Act of Cruelty." The cruelty and fallacy of dishorning graphically set forth in a résumé of the famous English dishorning case.

No. 5.--"Hints for the Dog Days." Dispels the many ignorant and false ideas in regard to rabies and hydrophobia, and gives valuable information concerning the dog, its nervous disorders, and its care.

No. 6.--"Rabies and Hydrophobia." Gives the opinions of medical men on these diseases, and refers to the Pasteur treatment and the Buisson cure by vapor baths.

These leaflets are intended for gratuitous distribution, and will be forwarded to any address on receipt of postage, as fol- *160* lows, per packet of 100: No. 1, six cents; No. 2, ten cents; Nos. 3 and 4, twenty-five cents; No. 5, ten cents, and No. 6, forty cents.

Title XVI of the Penal Code, relating to cruelty to animals, is also published by the Society in pamphlet form, and a copy will be forwarded to any one interested in the work.

A booklet entitled "Blessed are the Merciful," illustrating and describing the work of the Society, past and present, will be sent on request. *161*




There are two modes of proceeding, viz.: I. By giving the offender into the custody of a policeman, constable, or other officer. II. By the apprehension of the accused under a warrant.


By Giving the Offender into the Custody of an Officer

Authorized to Make Arrests.

When you personally witness an act of cruelty, call the attention of an officer to the nature of the offense, insist on the arrest of the offender; if you cannot accompany the accused to the magistrate, then give your name and address to the officer as a witness, and be sure to take his number, name, and precinct, in order that you may compel attention to the case. The law requires the police throughout this State to aid in the protection of dumb animals from injury and abuse; and should any officer refuse his assistance--which is not likely to occur--then take the number on his hat or shield, and report the same to the Society.


By the Arrest of the Accused Under Warrant.

When you do not personally see the act of cruelty, or when you can not procure an officer on the spot, or if the officer *162* refuses to act, then obtain the name and address of the offender, and that painted on the vehicle, if any, and the names and residences of those who witnessed the act, and lay the facts before a magistrate.

In All Cases

Make a note of the time when, and the street or place where, the offense occurred, and also the names and residences of all persons present and of any others who may be called as witnesses. If the offense was that of driving a horse or other animal with galled neck or shoulders, or other wounds, note the size and location of such wounds--especially if raw, discharging, or in contact with the harness. If the offense was flogging or beating, note the instrument, the number of blows, on what part of the body inflicted, and the effect, if any, on the skin of the animal; if overloading, carefully observe the symptoms of distress, such as the trembling, falling, unusual perspiration, or exhaustion. Report all cases of mutilation, such as docking tails of horses, cutting tails or ears of dogs, or any other torture; also cases of cruelty in the transporting of sheep, calves, game, fowls, or other poultry, or animals, while bounded by the legs or otherwise, in any part of this State, either on land or water. In every instance observe minutely and take down in writing the facts and details, and also the language of the offender at the time.


Complaints or inquiries made to the Society at its headquarters, by night or by day , will receive prompt attention; and all arrests for cruelty should be promptly reported there, to insure a proper prosecution of the case. *163*



See Illustrations, page 38

The dimensions of this tank are as follows: length, ten feet; width, five feet, and height, four feet six inches. A trap-door provided through which the animals are put into the tank, and four heavy plate-glass windows light the interior. Ordinary illuminating gas is admitted through an inch and one-quarter pipe, and when the tank is to be emptied escapes through a six-inch pipe. As shown by the illustration on page _____ a truck or cage rests on the bottom of the tank on tracks, the latter withdrawing from the tank so that the cage can be moved outside to facilitate the handling of the bodies of dead animals.

The method of destroying small animals by illuminating gas was adopted by the Society after a thorough investigation of other known methods, and is to be recommended from humane and sanitary standpoints. Illuminating gas produces anaesthesia or insensibility, and death follows almost instantaneously and is absolutely painless. Charcoal fumes cause asphyxia or suffocation, and the use of charcoal is not recommended for that reason.


From the 74th Annual Report of the Royal Society, London.

Share |