DARWIN ON THE DOG.
In many of his writings Darwin refers to the dog in an interesting and instructive manner, both in respect to the qualities absolutely possessed by the dog and in respect to others as they relate to those of different species.
The full force of Darwin’s remarks on the dog cannot be gathered from the quotations detached from their context. There is a mass of testimony of which the reference to the dog is but a trifling detail. Many of his remarks have a direct bearing on the possession of reason by the dog and on his power to communicate with his fellows through the medium of language, matters which have been treated in Forest And Stream recently. The following excerpts are taken from the chapter on mental powers in his famous work, “The Descent of Man:”
“Desor has remarked that no animal voluntarily imitates an action performed by man, until in the ascending scale we come to monkeys, which are well known to be ridiculous mockers. Animals, however, sometimes imitate each other’s actions; thus, two species of wolves, which had been reared by dogs, learned to bark, as does sometimes the jackal; but whether this can be called voluntary imitation is another question. Birds imitate the songs of their parents and sometimes of other birds, and parrots are notorious imitators of any sound which they often hear. Dureau de la Malie gives an account of a dog reared by a cat who learned to imitate the well-known action of a cat licking her paws and thus washing her ears and face; this was witnessed by the celebrated naturalist Audubon. I have received several confirmatory accounts; in one of these a dog had not been suckled by a cat, but had been brought up with one, together with kittens, and bad thus acquired the above habit, which he ever afterward practiced during his life of thirteen years. Dureau de la Malle’s dog likew se learned from the .kitten to play with a ball by rolling it about with his forepaws and springing on it. A correspondent assures me that a cat in his house used to put her paws into jugs of milk having too narrow a mouth for ber head. A kitten of this cat soon learned the same trick, and practiced it ever afterward whenever there was an opportunity.
”The parents of many animals, trusting to the principle of imitation in their young, and more especially to their instinctive or inherited tendencies, may be said to educate them. We see this when a cat brings a live mouse to her kittens; and Dureau de la Malle has given a curious account of his observations on hawks which taught their young dexterity as well as judgment of distances by first dropping through the air dead mice and sparrows, whicn the young generally failed to catch, and then bringing them live birds and letting them loose.
“Hardly any faculty is more important for the intellectual progress of man than attention. Animals clearly manifest this power, as when a cat watches by a hole and prepares to spring on its prey. Wild animals sometimes become so absorbed when thus engaged that they may be easily approached. Mr. Bar tie tt has given me a curious proof how variable this faculty is in monkeys. A man who trains monkeys to act in plays used to purchase common kinds from the Zoological Society at £5 for each; but he offered to give double the price if he might keep t^ree or four of them for a few-days in order to select one. When asked how he could possibly learn so soon whether a particular monkey would turn out a good actor, he answered that it all depended on their power of attention. If when he was talking and explaining anything to a monkey its attention was easily distracted, as by a fly on the wall or other trifling subject, the case was hopeless. If he tried by punishment to make an inattentive monkey act, it turned sulky. On the other hand, a monkey that carefully attended to him could always be trained.
“It is almost superfluous to state that animals have excellent memories for persons and places. A baboon at the Cape of Good Hope, as I have b en informed by Sir Andrew Smith, recognized him with joy after an absence of nine months. I had a dog who was savage and averse to all strangers, and I purposely tried his memory after an absence of five years and two days. I went near the stable where he lived and shouted to him in my old manner; he showed no joy, but instantly followed me out walking and obeyed me exactly as if I had parted with him only half an hour before. A train of old associations, dormant during five years, had thus been instantaneously awakened in his mind. Even ants, as P. Huber has clearly shown, recognized their fellow ants belonging to the same community after an absence of four months. Animals can certainly by some means judge of the intervals of time between recurrent events.
“The imagination is one of the highest prerogatives of man. By this faculty he writes former images and ideas independently of the will and thus creates brilliant and novel results. A poet, as Jean Paul Richter remarks, ‘who must reflect whether he shall make a character say yes or no—to the devil with him, he is only a stupid corpse.’ Dreaming gives us the best notion of this power; as Jean Paul again says, ‘The dream is an involuntary art of poetry.’ The value of the products of our imagination depends of course on the number, accuracy and clearness of our impressions, on our judgment and taste in selecting or rejecting the involuntary combinations, and to a certain extent on our power of voluntarily combining them. As dogs, cats, horses and probably all the higher animals, even birds, have vivid dreams, and this is shown by their movements and the sounds uttered, we must admit that they have some power of imagination. There must be something special which causes dogs to howl in the night, and especially during moonlight, in that remarkable and melancholy manner called baying. All dogs do not do so; according to Houzeau, they do not then look at the moon, but at some fixed point near the horizon. Houzeau thinks that their imaginations are disturbed by the vague outlines of the surrounding objects, and conjure up before them fantastic images; if this be so, their feelings may almost be called superstitious.
“Of all the faculties of the human mind it will, I presume, be admitted that reason stands at the summit. Only a few persons now dispute that animals possess some power of reasoning. Animals may constantly be seen to pause, deliberate and resolve. It is a significant fact that the more the habits of any particular animal are studied by a naturalist, the more he attributes to eason and the less to unlearned instincts. In future
chapters we shall see that some animals extremely low in the scale apparently display a certain amount of reason. No doubt it is often difficult to distinguish between the power of reason and that of instinct. For instance, Dr. Hayes, in his work on the ‘Open Polar Sea,’ repeatedly remarks that his dogs, instead of continuing,to draw the sledges in a compact body, diverged and separated when they came to thin ice, so that their weight might be more evenly distributed. This was often the first warning which the travelers received that the ice was becoming thin and dangerous. Now, did the dogs act thus from the experience of each individual or from the example of the older and wiser dogs, or from an inherited habit—that is, from instinct? This instinct may possibly have arisen since the time, long ago, when dogs were first employed by the natives in drawing sledges; or the Arctic wolves, the parent stock of the Esquimau dog, may have acquired an instinct impelling them not to attack their prey in a close pack when on thin ice.
“The following cases relate to dogs: Mr. Colquhoun winged two wild ducks which fell on the further side of a stream; his retriever tried to bring over both at once, but could not succeed; she then, though never before known to ruffle a feather, deliberately killed one, brought over the other and returned for the dead bird. Colonel Hutchinson relates that two partridges were shot at once, one being killed, the other wounded; the latter ran away and was caught by the retriever, who, on her return, came across the dead bird; ‘she stopped, evidently greatly puzzled, and after one or two trials, finding she could not take it up without permitting the escape of the winged bird, she considered a moment, then deliberately murdered it by giving it a severe crunch, and afterward brought away both together. This was the only known instance of her having wilfully injured any game.’ Here we have reason, though not quite perfect, for the retriever might have brought the wounded bird first and then returned for the dead one, as in the case of the two wild ducks. I give the two above cases as resting on the evidence of two independent witnesses, and because in both instances the retrievers after deliberation broke through a habit which is inherited by them (that of killing the game retrieved), and because they show how strong their reasoning faculty must have been to overcome a fixed habit.
“Our domestic dogs are descended from wolves and jackals, and though they may not have gained in cunning, and may have lost in wariness and suspicion, yet they have progressed in certain moral qualities, such as affection, trustworthiness, temper and probably in general intelligence.
“Language.—This faculty has justly been considered as one of the chief distinctions between man and the lower animals. But man, as a highly competent judge, Archbishop Whately remarks, ‘is not the only animal that can make use of language to express what is passing in his mind, and can understand, more or less, what is so expressed by another.’ In Paraguay the Cebus azarce when excited utters at least six distinct sounds, which excite in other monkeys similar emotions. The movements of the features and gestures of monkeys are understood by us, and they partly understand ours, as Rugger and others declare. It is a more remarkable fact that the dog, since being domesticated, has learned to bark in at least four or five distinct tones. Although barking is a new art, no doubt the wild parent-species of the dog expressed their feelings by cries of various kinds. With the domesticated dog we have the bark of eagerness, as in the chase; that of anger as well as growling; the yelp or howl of despair, as when shut up; the baying at night; the bark of joy, as when starting on a walk with his master; and the very distinct one of demand or supplication, as when wishing for a door or window to be opened. According to Houzeau, who paid particular attention to the subject, the domestic fowl utters at least a dozen significant sounds.
“The feeling of religious devotion is a highly complex one, consisting of love, complete submission to an exalted and mysterous superior, a strong sense of dependence, fear, reverence, gratitude, hope for the future and perhaps other elements. No being could feel so complex an emotion until advanced in his intellectual and moral faculties to at least a moderately high level. Nevertheless, we see some distinct approach to this state of mind in the deep love of a dog for his master, associated with complete submission, some fear and perhaps other feelings. The behavior-of a dog who returned to his master after an absence, and, as I may add, of a .monkey to his beloved keeper, is widely different from that toward their fellows. In the latter case the transports of joy appear to be somewhat less, and the sense of equality is shown in every action. Prof. Braubach goes so far as to maintain that a dog looks on his master as a god. *******
“Sociability.—Animals of many kinds are social; we find some distinct species living together; for example, some American monkeys and united flocks of rooks, jackdaws and starlings. Man shows the same feeling in the strong love for the dog, which the dog returns with interest. Everyone must have noticed how miserable horses, dogs, sheep, etc., are when separated from their companions, and what strong mutual affection the two former kinds at least show on their reunion. It is curious to speculate on the feelings of a dog who will rest peacefully for hours in a room with his master or any of the family, without the least notice being taken of him; but if left for a Bhort time by himself, barks or howls dismally. * * * The most common mutual service of the higher animals is to warn one another of danger by means of the united senses of all. Every sportsman knows, as Dr. Jaeger remarks, how difficult it is to approach animals in a herd or troop. Wild horses and cattle do not, I believe, make any danger signal; but the attitude of any one of them who first discovers an enemy warns the others. RabbitB stamp loudly on the ground with their hindfeet as a signal; sheep and chamois do the same with their forefeet, uttering likewise a whistle. Many birds and some mammals post sentinels, which in the case of seals are said generally to be females. The leader of a troop of monkeys acts as the sentinel, and^ utters cries expressive both of danger and of safety. * * * Wolves and some other beasts of prey hunt in
packs, and aid one another in attacking their victims. Pelicans fish in concert. The Hamadryas baboons turn over stones to find insects, etc., and when they come to a large one, as many as can stand around turn it over together and share the booty. Social animals mutually defend each other. Bull bisons in North America-, when there is danger, drive the cows and calves into the middle of the herd, while they defend the outside. In Abyssinia, Brehm encountered a great troop of baboons who were crossing a valley; some had already ascended the opposite mountain and some were still in the valley; the latter were attacked by the dogs, but the old males immediately hurried down from the rocks, and with mouths widely opened roared so fearfully that the dogs quickly drew back. They were again encouraged to the attack; but by this time all the baboons had reascended the heights, excepting a young one about six months old, who, loudly calling for aid, climbed on a block of rock and was surrounded. Now one of the largest males, a true hero, came down again from the mountain, slowly went to the • young one, coaxed him, and triumphantly led him away—the dogs being too much astonished to make an attack. * * * Many animals, however, certainly sympathize with each other’s distress or danger. This is the case even with birds. Captain Stansbury found on a salt lake in Utah an old and completely blind pelican, which was very fat and must have been well fed for a long time by his companions. Mr. Blyth, as he informs me, saw Indian crows feed two or three of their companions which were blind; and I have heard of an analagous case with the domestic cock. We may, if we choose, call these actions instinctive; but such cases are much too rare for the development of any special instinct. I have myself seen a dog who never passed a cat who lay sick in a basket and was a great friend of his without giving her a few licks with his tongue, the surest sign of kind feeling in a dog. It must be called sympathy that leads a courageous dog to fly at any one who strikes his master, as he certainly will. I saw a person pretend to beat a lady who had a very timid little dog on her lap, and the trial had never been made before; the little creature instantly jumped away, but after the pretended beating was over it was really pathetic to see how perseveringly he tried to lick his mistress’s face and comfort her. Brehm states that when a baboon in confinement was pursued to be punished, the others tried to protect him. * * * Besides love and sympathy, animals exhibit other qualities connected with the social instincts which in us would be called moral; and I agree with Agassiz that dogs possess something very like a conscience Dogs possess some powar of self-command, and this does not appear to be wholly the result of fear. As Braubach remarks, they will refrain from stealing food in the absence of the master. They have long been accepted as the very type of fidelity and obedience.”
Editor Forest and Stream:
“Alopecia areata is a disease of the pillary follicles, characterized by the sudden occurrence of general and asymmetrical or partial and asymmetrical baldness, the latter exhibited in distinctly circumscribed smooth patches, which are in typical cases entirely destitute of hair.”
The symptoms of this disease, according to Dr. Jas. Nevins Hyde, A. M., M. D., in his work on diseases of the skin, may be at its outset accompanied by symptoms of ill health, such as malaria, loss of appetite, mal-nutrition, etc.
In the three cases I have met with in canine practice none of the above symptoms have been present, and in fact to all appearance the animals have been in excellent health when presented to me for treatment, and in cases 1 and 2 the cisease manifested itself by the sudden and complete loss of hair in round or nearly circular patches, and presented the appearance of having been scalded, so completely bare were the parts affected.
Hyde describes it in human practice as presenting roundish, or oval, or irregularly shaped patches, varying in size from a small coin upward, and states that they may be so numerous as to disfigure the entire scalp, and while they may touch at the borders when thus numerous they can scarcely be said to coalesce, as the line of demarcation is recognizable; and he states that in point of abnormal sensations, temperature or signs of disease of the surface from which the hairs have fallen as a rule show complete absence of symptoms, and that the skin when the disease is in complete evolution is usually normal to the touch, but occasionally ana>mic, thinned and more movable in the affected parts than in the parts not touched by the disease. The latter or amtmic condition I have _ found in cases presented to me, but whether from the dis’ease or from the effect of previous unsuccessful medication I could not say.
The cause of the disease seems to be obscure. According to all authorities it is not transmitted by heredity or contagion, and yet it is claimed it is not due to a parasite, and the neurotic explanation is now generally accepted as fait accumulate bearing on its etiology. This 1 can hardly reconcile myself to believe is the cause of the disease in the dog, and while I cannot give a probable, satisfactory explanation of its cause, I do from observation believe it is parasitic; and further, that while authorities claim it is not infectious, I am inclined to believe it is, from the fact that such history as I could obtain regarding the cases showed that, while it appeared in two or three patches simultaneously, it invariably affected adjoining parts in the course of a few weeks, which were caused I believe by subcutaneous infection.
Pathology.—The anatomical lesions which produce alopecia have not been recognized. The hairs fallen from the surface, according to Hyde, when examined by a microscope, appear to be atrophied in the bulb and shaft, and he states that no parasite can be discovered in uncomplicated cases; but that he had in one instance detected spores and mycliaof the trichopyton in the hairs. His diagnosis alopecia areata is distinguishable from ringworm, and favors by the suddenness of its onset the absence of all stumps of hairs, scales, crusts or evidences of irritation in the parts involved, and the complete baldness and smoothness.
Treatment.—According to the author above referred to he states that one must necessarily view with distrust all treatment for a disease which, while continuing for months or years, usually terminates in spontaneous recovery, and in the meantime bids defiance to each and every therapeutic measure. Nevertheless persistent and hopeful management in even apparently desperate cases is occasionally rewarded by such brilliant consequences that, however slight may be the belief in the treatment employed, it deserves recognition. He prescribes such remedies as the following, either alone or in combination: Camphor, cantharides, carbolic acid, croton oil, tinct. capsicum, etc., in the form of stimulating lotions applied with friction to tha parts affected, all of which should recommend themselves to the practitioner or party having the disease under treatment. My own treatment, while it has proved eminently satisfactory so far, I should like to hear of it being used by others, and their success reported. It is as follows:
Case No. 1.—A small black and tan terrier was affected with patches the size of hen’s eggs on the shoulder, back, rump, one side and under neck; had been so for six months, and everything in the way of mange cure tried; dog ordered washed thoroughly and ono patch painted thoroughly with cantharidal collodion, two or three applications until blistering was produced; after puncturing the blister andgapplying vaseline as an emollient, a second place was treated the same, and so on, a patch being blistered every three or four days until all had been treated, when a wash composed of alcohol, 1 pint, balsam Peru, 2oz., was applied alternately with a dressing of crude petroleum. This was used every three or four days and a cure was effected in between three and four months. The only internal treatment employed was occasional small doses of quinine as a tonic.
No. 2 was a large dog of the Newfoundland species. The disease made its appearance simultaneously on his back and head. So sudden did it come that the owner himself declared that some servant had poured boiling water on the dog, and only for the lack of any soreness previous t< > the loss of hair or at the time I was called, I confess I would have been most inclined to concide with him. This case was treated same as No. 1; while it did not make its appearance in any new places, it was quite stubborn in its amenability to treatment, being fully six months before the patch on the skull was restored to its normal condition. I would say that in this case I also used rum sulp. lgr., ferri sulp. lgr., arsenic acid ^i/gr., given in pill three times a day.
Case No. 8 is now under treatment. He is a black, corded poodle about five months old, in apparently good health otherwise. He is affected in five places: each side, on back, on neck and on the throat well up toward the jaws. This dog was purchased in New York, and the seller stated that it had been scalded with hot water, but that as it was a long-haired dog nb one would see it. I was called, as they wished to see if possibly something could not be done to permit the growth of the hair in the spots so called. In examining him, I found more spots affected than they had seen, and after calling their attention to the fact that it was noxt to impossible for the dog to get accidentally scalded so high up under the neck, I suggested that it was from disease, and took it for treatment. One of the most eminent physicians in the State and a man of almost national reputation has interested himself in the case on account of its rarity. He pronounces it a typical case of the disease, and is watching the effects of treatment preparatory to reporting it in the medical press. .albert.
POINTS AND FLUSHES.
Puppies and Training.
The manner in which many people care for puppies, as compared with the high expectations which they have concerning their puppies’ mental and physical development, are so antagonistic that they are sources of wonderment to those who give the matter rational thought. Many puppies and dogs are kept in confinement, or, what is worse, on a chain. If under restraint on a chain, the puppy or dog acquires a habit of standing at the extreme length of it, pulling it taut. This strained position, elbows out and neck set hard in the collar, the whole body leaning forward and resting against the collar, soon becomes habitual, and then he stands out of Bhape when not on chain. The puppy grows up with light andf badly formed bone, elbow out, and, from constant fretting and irritation, with a most ill-favored countenance. The scowl which comes from tugging at the end of a chain, from anxiety to be released, and from the irritation of such confinement, in time becomes permanently set and mars the dog’s expression. For his beBt development and health, the dog requires freedom.
Any man, if confined to his room with nothing to read and no one to give him any information, would consider himself unjustly treated if he were expected to learn worldly ways and worldly knowledge under such circumstances. The puppy cannot learn when confined. He learns only by direct experience. Unlike man he can gain no knowledge from the speech of others or from writings. Cut off his powers of observation and the source of all knowledge is cut off from him. Confine him, his physical development is impaired. The dog thrives only when he has sufficient liberty. The knowledge which man teaches him is but little compared to the vast knowledge which he acquires from his own observation and perception. Information does not come to him by instinct. If it were so the dog, if kept in confinement all his life, would have an equal knowledge with the one which has its liberty. Everyone who has owned dogs knows how essential experience is to them. The city dog in the country for the first time is in a new world. He chases sheep at first sight and all kinds of fowl are alike his prey. A frog is a source of quizzical wonder and careful investigation, while a butterfly affords delight. Yet the country dog in town for the first time has far more complexities to encounter and many dangers to learn and guard against. The strange noises of the city are terrifying to him; the crowds of people cut off his view of his master, and if a corner is turned he is lost.
Only by experience can the dog learn the problem of living. Give him his liberty and he will gain his own knowledge of every-day life, he will grow up healthy and vigorous and his temper will be sweet and even. Inaction and seclusion have the same effects on both men and dogs —undeveloped minds and bodies.
There is no doubt but what in any community which has sufficient age and interests to establish itself permanently the ownership of dogs must be so regulated as to conform to the requirements of the public good, and the
increase and liberty of homeless and ownerless cur dogs must be restricted to such numbers as are harmless to the community. Nearly all cities have provided legal and humane means for the capture and disposition or destruction of such dogs as are harmful or offensive to them. Their capture is effected with as little tumult and demonstration as possible. The laws are directed toward freeing the community of a nuisance in a dignified and orderly manner, by efforts which are made with a commonplace, every-day regularity the year round. The dogs which are valueless or ownerless are privately destroyed. There is no publicity, no sensation. The public mind is thus not brutalized and degraded by the sights of pursuit and bloodshed on the streets; innocent onlookers are not in danger of losing life or limb from the reckless shooting of the official killers; the peace of the community is not disturbed nor is its business suspended to witness a gory sensation, and sensible discrimination is observed in saving the valuable well-bred dog from the death inflicted on the homeless or vicious cur. When a policeman with pistol in hand, followed by an excited crowd, is in pursuit of a dog, he is very apt to have in mind the dramatic effect and his own egotistical personality quite as much as the simple matter of ridding the community of homeless dogs. The mob, when once excited by the pursuit, deBires to see blood regardless of the merits of the case.
It is strange that at this year of civilization a city can be found where such open brutality and senseless, erratic methods prevail as those adopted by the citizens of Elizabeth, N. J., if the press accounts of them be true. It is pleasing, on the other hand, to note that a part at least of the daily press can discuss the matter in a sensibl manner, free from the exaggerations and sensationae features which it deems so necessary in treating of any event connected with the violent death of a dog or dogs.
Touching on the recent killing of dogs at Elizabeth, N. J., which in its details reads more like a description of an annual battue for the edification of the police, the Sunday Call, Easton, Pa., has the following very sensible editorial under the caption, “Which are the Brutes?”
“Which are the brutes, the officials or the dogs? Elizabeth, N. J., is making its annual raid against dogs, and its authorities have within a few days butchered over 1001 dogs that have appeared to be not within the letter of their dog law. A dog found on the street without a collar and license tag, or a muzzle, is shot without ado by any policeman. It does not signify whether the dog is registered or not. If by any accident he appears without his paraphernalia he is shot. This butchering is carried on by the instruction of the Mayor. Many valuable dogs have been butchered whose owners have endeavored not to transgress the dog laws, and much hot blood is the result. New Jersey within the last decade has proclaimed more bad dogs and more epidemics of rabies than the rest of the earth has exhibited since the creation. Her dog laws are brutal, and the sundry crusades in her towns have been as brutal as they are senseless. The muzzling law in hot weather, when a dog needs water and his open-mouthed respiration, which stands him in lieu of the perspiration of other animals, is brutal, and the law which allows officers to kill dogs indiscriminately is brutal. Summer dog laws are mainly directed against the fancied danger of hydrophobia, one of the rarest of diseases, the authenticated cases of it usually occurring in winter, which being the fact muzzling in summer is as unnecessary as it is brutal. There seemingly should be mental resource in New Jersey, if not in Elizabeth, sufficient to make sensible dog laws. The registration and taxation of dogs are not objectionable. Muzzles are needless at any season as a safeguard against rabies. Vicious dogs are barely worth considering, as any neighborhood will protect itself against such dogs. But whatever dog laws Elizabeth or any other town may see fit to enact, the principle should prevail that punishment should first be visited on the owner of the dog, and not death upon the innocent dog. The covert dog poisoner ranks among men as a Bkulking coward, as well Cm brute. And the official wholesale butchery of dogs in Elizabeth ranks those who are responsible for it as brutes in the estimation of all humane persons.”
The hot weather seems to have less effect on the poor dogs than it does on the more intelligent biped. The ignorance and imaginary fears of the people, with a love of the sensational superadded, are the causes of much cruelty to the dog.
Nevertheless the killing of dogs, as practiced with such offensive publicity and brutality by the police of Elizabeth, cannot justly be blamed on them. The Mayor, with the hot weather ideas which he unfairly attributes to the dogs, should be muzzled politically when the next election takes place, regardless of his political faith.
There is constantly manifested by the daily press, and the papers specially devoted to the dog and gun are not free from the evil, a disposition to color any dog story with tinges of the marvelous, or fantastical, or even the supernatural. The common test of reasonable action or possible or accidental happening is not seasoned properly for the news writer or his readers. It must be made extraordinary or sensational.
A dog meets a death in a manner out of the ordinary and forthwith it is heralded to the world as an act of suicide. It does not matter that the writers of such trash cannot possibly know of the dog’s intentions; such absence of knowledge does not affect in the least the fulness and firmness of their assertions. A dog has a fit in the street; a cry of mad dog is raised; the frantic efforts of the dog while afflicted or his dazed efforts to escape while recovering are all perverted into furious and ferocious onslaughts, in the relation of the circumstance after it is all past. A dog performs some acts which he was taught, and forthwith it is discovered that he inherited a knowledge of how to perform them. There never was a better time than the present for the kennel and daily press and dog owners of the country to be governed by the rules of common sense in treating of dogs and their doings. The fantastic, the wonderful and the supernatural have no more place in the phenomena of dog life than they have in the life of any other organic beings. B. Waters.
Mr. E. M. Oldham will have the general management of the kennels of Spratts Patent, on the retirement of Mr. John Brett, which, takes place in a short time. Mr. Oldham will have the’ management of the kennel matters in addition to the other important interests which he cares for so efficiently and popularly.