§ MR. HENNIKER HEATON (Canterbury)I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether the Departmental Committee, appointed to inquire into the Dog Laws, will take evidence as to the inefficacy of the muzzle in preventing rabies or dogs from biting; whether evidence of that nature has been tendered, and when it is likely to be taken; and, whether any special payments are made to the police for what they do in regard to dogs under the muzzling orders; and, if so, to what amount and on what principle are such payments awarded?
§ *THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE (Mr. WALTER LONG,) Liverpool, West DerbyI understand 1628 that evidence as to the value of muzzling for the purpose of preventing the spread of rabies has already been received by the Departmental Committee, and that further evidence on the same subject has been tendered and will be given at the next and succeeding meetings. It rests with the various police authorities to determine whether special payments should be made for work done under muzzling orders, and no general information on the subject is available. I may state, however, that in the Metropolis no such payments are made, but certain fees taken on the restoration of dogs to their owners are paid into the Police Pension Fund.