PROTECTION OF ANIMALS (CRUELTY TO DOGS) (SCOTLAND) BILL. (Hansard, 13 June 1934)

§ LORD AMULREE
My Lords, this Bill follows the lines of the Bill which was last year piloted through your Lordships' House by the noble Lord, Lord Banbury of Southam, and applies to Scotland. The Bill in general terms gives power to the court to order a person convicted of cruelty to a dog to be disqualified for keeping a dog or for holding or obtaining a dog licence for such period as the court thinks fit. It also provides that where a person holds a dog licence and is convicted the licence is to be suspended so long as the disqualification continues in force. The Bill also gives power to a person convicted to appeal, and during the pendency of the appeal the court which has made the order may, if it thinks fit, suspend its operation. If a person who is disqualified by an order keeps a dog or applies for or obtains a dog licence while he is so disqualified he is liable on summary conviction to a fine of £25 or to imprisonment not exceeding three months. As I said, the Bill generally follows the lines of the Bill which was passed last year, and if it becomes law the law of Scotland in this respect will be assimilated to the law of England.
The convictions that have taken place in England and the orders of disqualifica 1079 tion that have been made under the Act of last year show the extraordinary cases of cruelty that take place. In one case a person was convicted of burying a dog alive. The charge was that of causing unnecessary suffering to a dog by unreasonably attempting to kill it in an improper manner. The person was sentenced to six weeks hard labour and disqualified from holding a dog licence for two years. Another case occurred at a greyhound racing track, where a man charged with cruelty to a greyhound was stated to have applied turpentine to its body with the object of making it run faster. The dog suffered such acute agony that it could not walk. The man was fined £10 and prohibited from keeping a dog. In another case a man trussed up a dog with six yards of rope and threw it into a river. The cries of the dog were heard by passers-by, but it was dark and an hour and a half passed before the animal was found. When the rope was cut the dog was too weak to stand. The man was sentenced to fourteen days imprisonment and he was disqualified for three years. In another case a terrier was beaten with an iron rod; the man was convicted and sentenced and his licence suspended. I have reports of other cases of a similar nature. They only show that the House was right in passing the Bill last year. The present Bill passed the House of Commons without any opposition. It is in my opinion a necessary measure and would prove a useful piece of legislation.

§ THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (LORD STRATHCONA AND MOUNT ROYAL)
My Lords, as far as the Department which I represent is concerned the value of this Bill is recognised, and an early and easy passage through this House is anticipated with official approval.

THE EARL OF KINNOULL
My Lords, I took a fairly prominent part in the discussions on the Bill Which, as my noble friend Lord Amulree has stated, was passed last year. This Bill will bring Scotland into line with England, and I hope that your Lordships will unanimously support it. The noble Lord, 1080 Lord Amulree, referred to the fact that in England several people have been fined and imprisonment has been imposed. Personally I should like to inflict imprisonment on anybody convicted of cruelty to a dog, and I am certain that every member of your Lordships' House feels the same. My noble friend referred to greyhound racing. I know of cases where greyhounds have had their toe nails tied together with bits of string in order to impede them from running fast, thereby causing them a great deal of agony. I am very pleased indeed to think that the law for Scotland will be brought into line with the English law.