The Indian keeps dogs for food, and goes naked. The pioneer hunter keeps dogs to procure him food and dresses in peltry. The highest type of man prefers mutton and dresses in purple and fine linen. To keep a watch dog now is a remnant of the barbarous age when men secured their living by the chase. It is a sign of the savagery out of which the race is growing by slow degrees.

Shall the race of dogs be exterminated? Yes, and the sooner it is done the better. Some one has written in the bitterness of his soul: If the legislature will not pass a law so that farmers can protect themselves. from dogs, God Almighty has given every man the right to protect himself which neither legislatures nor courts can abridge: If it be necessary let the farmers organize secret clubs and let dogs if they are mean enough to associate with a man with a gun know there is no safety for them."

Softly, friend, the paragraph smacks of profanity. Again, there is no need of secrecy, much less of any organization to reach a time when dogs will be as scarce as blue roses. It is still uglier to poison him. Grave and reverend senators have looked this question all over, and the decision as to the method is at " the bottom of the well." The evil is apparent: the adequate remedy is hidden in obscurity. What would your secret clubs of farmers accomplish? They would kill a score of dogs meanly, in a cowardly way; they would excite a score of animosities which would divide friends, and excite feuds that would outlive a generation of men. This work done however secretly will surely be revealed. The better way is to trust to the higher civilization which is coming slowly but surely. The savage in men is going out; and the higher nature is growing. It is a fact that pet dogs are going out of fashion. They do not command the care they did a few years ago; and the aristocratic dog, once pampered and nursed on the lap of luxury is finding his place with the democratic dogs that skirmish through the back alleys. That is a glorious token for good! Mrs. buries her Scotch terrier in Woodlawn Cemetery at a cost of $500. His remains have to go; the people who allowed it, now disallow it; and dog, coffin, monument have to go. That is another token for good; for if the advancing civilization will not allow the very dead dog to rest in peaceful quiet in his tomb, is it not an index that they will have less love for the living canine? Wait a little, watch a little, by and by the whole world will be regenerated and there will not be a sheep killing or a hydrophobia inoculating dog in all the boundless universe.

In Chicago is a dog pound; it is a frame structure 84 x 50 feet. There are dog catchers. They capture unlicensed dogs. There is a bog in which 100 dogs are placed; a match is applied to a little furnace, and in exactly two minutes there are 100 dead dogs. These are carried away and turned into fertilizers, or hair oil. The manner of capture and killing is kindly. But, why should there be dogs in Chicago, creating the necessity of dog catchers, dog pounds, dog "parlors," dog destruction, and dog reduction to fertilizers? It is simply because that much of the savagery of our ancestry has been transmitted and the process of evolution has not gone far enough to totally eradicate it.

In the general view of the agricultural condition of 1887 there is printed an official statement, showing the number and value of our domestic animals killed or injured by dogs. It is a significant table now. It shows that 1,595 sheep were killed, fifty-seven head of cattle, twenty-nine horses, and 100 hogs. The . estimated value of all stock killed or injured is $8,591.41. That is a very small amount. The dollars and cents lost are insignificant. The sheep alone at $2.41 per head have a value of $985,249, or not one dollar in a thousand of value. That is not the question. Remove it from the sordid basis of profit, and bring it up to the ideal of sentiment; there the loss is clearly seen. The man who has a sheep torn by dogs does not calculate on his loss in dollars,-but measure it by his attachment to his sheep. If the sheep had died, he may not have cared; if some one had stolen it, he might not make effort to capture the thief; if it had strayed away he might, like the good shepherd of old have left the ninety and nine in the wilderness and gone off after the lost one; and when he had found it, he would have borne it on his shoulders, and on reaching home would have called in his neighbors to rejoice with him saying, "rejoice with me, for I have found my sheep which was lost." But to see his flock mangled, torn and bleeding by an utterly worthless dog is the end and limit of all human patience and endurance.

The results of the legislation in Ohio are briefly summarized in the following item: The auditor of Ohio has made public the statistics of last year in regard to sheep killed and the income raised by the tag on dogs. During the year 30,234 sheep were killed, valued at $99,948.52; 29,326 sheep were injured to the amount of $46,254.18, total injured and killed 59,560 sheep, at a valuation of $146,202.70. The total tag collected on dogs, including former balances was $357,844.77. Out of this sum $97,777.35 was paid for sheep killed, and $40,458.02 for sheep injured; total, $138,235.37. The school fund and others got $63,660, leaving $155,749.37 still available.