HC Deb 16 June 1865 vol 180 cc365-6

said, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether, to prevent accidents from ownerless dogs in the Metropolis and its environs (four persons having been yesterday bitten by such dogs), he does not think it advisable to bring in a Bill for the destruction by the police, by strychnine or other means, of all dogs going about without collars and the addresses of their owners thereon?


said, in reply, that by the Metropolitan Police Act constables were authorized to destroy all dogs that were suspected to be in a rabid state, and the owners of dogs which were known to be dangerous were liable to penalties for allowing them to be at large. Whether any other measures ought to be adopted to prevent evil arising from the number of dogs in the streets he was not at that moment prepared to say. It might be desirable that dogs at large in the streets should wear muzzles, which, while not confining their mouths so as to drive them mad, might prevent them from doing any injury. He did not think that any great security would be given to the public by merely requiring that every dog should have round his neck a collar bearing the name and address of his owner.