Our Cabin, 1821.
Our Cabin, 1821.
Our Cabin, 1821.
The sense called “power of scent” is exceedingly delicate in the dog, enabling him to followthe course of one animal amid a multitude of “tracks” made by others of the same species. This power of discrimination is frequently manifest even in the common house-dog as he traces the footsteps of his master or those of his master’s horse through crowded thoroughfares and winding ways, although hundreds of similar feet have passed over the ground after the walk of the one he seeks was made. But, to tell any one but an old foxhunter that it was possible to find perfection in a dog sufficiently, under the most favorable circumstances, to run all day on a trail ten hours’cold, would be deemed purely chimerical.—Gamer is no more.—James Gibbs has long been numbered with the dead.—And of those who participated in and enjoyed the pleasures of that day’s chase but one remains a living witness of the factsherein stated—the old Roman—the Hon. Allen G. Thurman.—It is a notable fact, that in after years, when those Ohio boys no longer resembled the festivehunter, they always gave a smile of pleasure at the mention of those merry times; and, even in old age, when oppressed with the heavy hand of time, nothing awakened the flush of youthful pride and satisfaction like the rehearsal of the deeds of the hound that had no equal in the history of the country—“Gibbs’ Stray Pup.”
The exterior beauties of an animal are always attractive. But more than these do we admire those qualities termed intelligence, instinct, and reason in their beneficent relations to man and the external world. The dog possesses a most wonderful harmony in form and faculties. He is the type and embodiment of beauty, strength, and freedom of motion combined with endurance, courage, zeal, fidelity, constancy, and uncompromising affection. For these reasons he is of all man’s friends, the most valuable, the truest, and the best. So devoted and unchangeable is his love, that he is ever ready to sacrifice his life to save his master from threatened injury. He long remembers a kindness, and soon forgives ill usage. At an early age he obtains a knowledge of the meaning of words in the language of his master, and understands and obeys commands; and with that retentive memory which animals possess, he never falters or forgets. The story ofUlysses and his favorite is but the citation of the tenacity of memory which belongs to the species. After twenty years—
“Near to the gates, conferring as they drewArgus, the dog his ancient master knew,And not unconscious of the voice and tread,He knew his lord, he knew, and strove to meet;In vain he strove to crawl and kiss his feet;Yet, all he could, his tail, his ears, his eyesSalute his master and confess his joys.”
“Near to the gates, conferring as they drewArgus, the dog his ancient master knew,And not unconscious of the voice and tread,He knew his lord, he knew, and strove to meet;In vain he strove to crawl and kiss his feet;Yet, all he could, his tail, his ears, his eyesSalute his master and confess his joys.”
“Near to the gates, conferring as they drewArgus, the dog his ancient master knew,And not unconscious of the voice and tread,He knew his lord, he knew, and strove to meet;In vain he strove to crawl and kiss his feet;Yet, all he could, his tail, his ears, his eyesSalute his master and confess his joys.”
“Near to the gates, conferring as they drew
Argus, the dog his ancient master knew,
And not unconscious of the voice and tread,
He knew his lord, he knew, and strove to meet;
In vain he strove to crawl and kiss his feet;
Yet, all he could, his tail, his ears, his eyes
Salute his master and confess his joys.”
From prince to beggar, all the same—the only friend neither misfortune nor poverty can drive away. He is watchful and bold, and with delight guards his master’s house and herds from thieves and rapacious animals, and by his various services has accomplished for man’s happiness and advancement in civilizationmore than all other agencies combined. Without this aid, man would scarcely have maintained his existence on earth. “When he had ‘evolved’ to the ape,”[4]and “for safety lived in tree-tops with monkeys and squirrels,” his security and advancement was not so probably due to the suggestive “club” as totrainingof dogs, which is given by the great naturalist, Buffon, as the first art invented by man.
By means of dogs, the rapacious animals common to new or uninhabited countries are captured or driven to the rear of advancing population. Almost every emigrant in the earlier settlementsof Ohio, from necessity, became more or less a hunter with dogs, not only to provide for the family, but as a profit in ridding the locality of thieving varments with which the forests were overrun. The pelts of fur animals were a legal tender, and were received as contributions and payment of debts. And the bark of the industrious dog was in this way transformed into literary and religious institutions of the country. And if not for his dogship, the “North-west” would be a wilderness still, inhabited by wild animals. The great naturalist says: “To determine the importance of the species in the order of nature, let us suppose it never had existed.” Without the assistance of the dog, how could man be able to tame and reduce other animals into slavery? How could he discover, hunt, and destroy noxious and savage beasts? To preserve his own safety, and to render himself master of the animated world, it was necessary to make friends among those animals whom he found capable of attachment to oppose them to others; therefore, the training of dogs seems to have been the first art invented by man, and the first fruit of that art was the conquest and peaceable possession of the earth.
Many species of animals have greater agility, swiftness, and strength, as well as greater courage than man. Nature has furnished them better. And the dog not only excels in these, but also in the senses—hearing, seeing, andsmelling; and to have gained possession over a tractable and courageous species like the dog, was acquiring new or additional agility, swiftness, strength, and courage with a mysterious increase of power and usefulness of the more important senses. And by the friendship and superior faculties of the dog, man became permanently sovereign and master of all.
“The dog is the only animal whose talents are evident, and whose education is always successful.”[5]
No better picture, portraying the noble qualities of the dog could be given than that by Buffon. And why this close observer of nature should say—“Without having like manthe faculty of thought,” has always seemed strange. It sounds like a misprint, or an error in translation. Thought is the exercise of the mind—reflection, meditation, consideration, conception, conclusion, judgment, design, purpose, intention, solicitude, anxious care, concern, etc.
Who is there, even with ordinary acquaintance with the animal, that has not witnessed some if not all these attributes of “thought?” Most writers on the subject have shown a desire to give the human animal some distinguishing quality or faculty above all others, but their line of demarcation between man and the rest ofanimal creation has not been altogether successful, as man can not claim by the high authority that he is the only species that has the something called “spirit,” which is necessary in order “to think;” for the sacred book teaches that man and beast are alike in this, but thespiritof man goeth upward, while thespiritof the beast goeth downward to the earth, and which in anti-bellum days constituted a knotty text for Southern theologians who taught that “niggers and dogs” have no souls.
An eminent Scotch clergyman, who has made a study of natural history believes that dogs are possessed of the same faculties as man, differing only in degrees. He asserts that conscience in man and conscience in the dog are essentially the same things. And Charles Dickens declares that dogs have a moral nature—an unmistakable ability to distinguish between right and wrong, which led him to believe the difference in the dog nature and the so-called spiritual nature in man was imperceptible, and that future existence rested upon like natural foundations.
It would be holding conclusions in opposition to all rules of observation to say that dogs and other animals are destitute of the faculty of “thought.” When the awful torrents came sweeping down upon Johnstown the terrible waves and debris dashed over housetops and Mrs. Kress was carried away by the wild current in an instant beyondhuman help, her faithful dog, unmindful of himself, jumped after her, and when he saw her dress come to the surface, seized and carried her to another housetop. Soon this house was demolished, but Romeo kept the head of Mrs. Kress out of water and battled with the raging current and floating timber for more than half an hour before he reached the roof of another house, where she was taken up unconscious with fright and exhaustion. When the dog saw the motionless condition of his mistress he barked and howled and made pitiful demonstrations of grief, for he “thought” she was dead; but when she breathed he became delighted and manifested his joy in a way that could not be mistaken.
For eight summers a little cocker spaniel (Archos) was daily with the writer in field and forest, and to his industry and sagacity is due no small part of the success in obtaining fresh specimens for the life size, hand-colored work by Mrs. N. E. Jones, entitled, “The Illustrations of the Nests and Eggs of Birds of Ohio.” Many of the rare small birds build on or near the ground in thick cover, and among those he was credited with finding may be mentioned the obscure nest and eggs of the Helminthophaga pinus—Blue-winged yellow warbler, and the nest of the Geothlypistrichas—Maryland yellow-throat. He knew the object of pursuit as well as his master, and delighted in finding these little homes, and would stand firmly on a point, asit was understood between us that the bird must be shot when flushed for positive identification. He knew what his master was doing, for he understood the meaning of almost all words used in ordinary conversation, and could transact business on orders with admirable accuracy.
While out with a friend quail shooting, the sun was warm and we sat down on the cool grass in a fence corner shaded by the dead leaves on an oak bush. The little cocker was panting with heat and enjoyed the shade quite as much as his master. Soon a voice was heard from my friend, on the opposite border of a large field, calling: “Send Archos over here. I have a dead bird my dog can’t find.” The cocker paid no attention to the call, and no reply was made by the writer. And to show how much a dog may acquire of the meaning of words in a few years, I said to Archos in a conversational tone, as he ceased panting and fixed his great dark eyes on the speaker: “Ed has lost a dead bird—he can not find it; you go over and get it.” No sooner said than the little fellow started off in the tall ragweed which covered the field, and unknown to my friend scented the dead bird and brought it and laid it at my feet, all the time smiling and wagging the tail, as much as to say, “I would like to tell you how nicely that was done, but I can’t talk—dare not.”
Bab says: “Away back in some old book there is a story how dogs used to talk, and were men’sadvisers. One day a great prince met a beautiful woman, and despite of the advice of the dog who was his counselor, he married her, and he made her cousin, a beggar, his prime minister. Amid the festivities, the dog warned the prince to watch the woman, told the prince that she was unfaithful, that her cousin was her lover, and that between them they would rob the kingdom and drive him from the throne. He turned on the dog and cursed him—cursed him so that this good friend, looking at the prince, said: ‘Until men are grateful and women are faithful, I and my kind will never speak again.’”
The world has grown older and better, but for the peace of society and quiet of social relations, it’s well he still holds his tongue. Professor Garner, who has devoted much time to the study of animals in this country and in Africa, has confirmed the general observation of those familiar with rural life to be true: that cattle—as horses, sheep, hogs and other animals—talk among their kind. What there is to be detected in the manner of delivery of the same sound, giving out entirely different sensations, is yet to be discovered. The squeal of the hungry pig, repeated by the phonograph, only increases the hunger and squeal of the pig that hears it; while to repeat the similar squeal of a pig in pain, at once causes manifest fear, anger and distress in all the pigs that hear it. And it must be so—all domestic animals do think and reason, and not unoftenare enabled to make their thoughts known by signs and sounds to those to whom they look for help and comfort other than their kind.
Dogs are utilized extensively in Germany and other parts of Europe as draft animals. The United States consul says, in the large, wealthy and industrial city of Leige, and throughout Belgium, dogs are used for delivery of goods by all the trades of the city. While they are used as hewers of wood and drawers of water, the species is the most versatile in talents of the animal creation—and the dog makes the most accurate critic, the most successful detective, most reliable witness, best sentinel and most trustworthy friend.
Persons do not stop to think there is a world of intelligence, love and affection outside the human head and heart, and innocently ask, “What makes the dog heed every word when his master says ‘you can not go with me this time?’ What makes him place himself at the most observing point and look wistfully after his departing friends until they disappear in the distance? Why does he stay, perchance all day, at a favorable point to hear or see a returning approach, anxiously waiting and watching, and at the well-known and accurately distinguished sounds of the footsteps of his master’s horse from all others, runs to meet his master, and barks and laughs and cries with joy andgladness?” The beneficence of creation gives the answer in a world of unselfish love.
Dogs know nothing of hypocrisy—are always sincere—never lie—dislike ridicule—and never accept nor offer a joke.
The dog has been recognized as valuable property by his owner in every age, nation and people on the face of the earth; but with no staple market price any more than there is for that of the horse. The consideration is determined by amount of education, usefulness or purposes which he is capable of fulfilling.
Colonel D. D. Harris, of Mendon, Michigan, refused more than once ten thousand dollars for his famous sableScotch Collie. He was a dog of such note, with the refined people of the world, that he was privileged to walk through the Vatican, and was entertained by the President of France—the Czar of the Russias—the King of Norway and Sweden, and other nobility of the old world. President Cleveland stroked his glossy coat, and he received the most grateful attention among all the courts visited in this and in other countries.
This Collie was never on public exhibition, but was the traveling companion of his owner. He could select any card called for in the deck—if not there, would say so by giving a whine—could distinguish colors as well as any human being; and could count money and make change with the rapidity and accuracy of an expert bankaccountant. If told to make change of $31.31, or any other amounts from coins of various denominations, he could do so rapidly and without mistake. This intelligent dog lived out his allotted brief existence, dying at the age of fourteen years; but was better known than thousands of men who have lived much longer, thinking themselves quite eminent.
If dogs are not valuable property why are they exchanged at high rates in dollars and cents? Why did Mr. E. R. Sears, of Melrose, Mass., part with his twelve thousand five hundred dollars in “greenbacks” for the dog Bedivere? It may besaidthe one who purchased a dog at that price was “green”—if said, it would be a mistake, forGreenwas the gentleman who sold him.
The greater part of the early population of Ohio associated with dogs much of their time, and with good results. But the law-makers of the state, or a majority, had a penchant for self-elevation by legislating against those they feared as rivals—“dogs and niggers.” Consequently, “Black laws” and dog laws engrossed the time and talents of law-makers, who felt measurably unsafe unless the former were excluded as property and the latter deprived of citizenship.
The sensitive, if not infallible, Supreme Court has recently given the property rights and protection of the dog a bad set-back in the decision that “dogs are not property,” and outside ofproperty it would seem there can be no ownership. But as decisions of the learned court are not required to be accepted in silence by the canine species,this oneaffecting their rights is enough to make every dog of high and low degree, from Maine to California, rise up with a prodigious howl of contempt.
The logic by which the high court was enabled to enunciate its decision is quite as remarkable as the decision itself. It would seem the learned court divided the animal creation into two parts—“useful and useless,” and subdivided these into “wild and domestic beasts;” and then states: “Dogs belong to the non-useful, wild animal division.”Ergo: “Wild animals, as dogs which have been domesticated, are therefore propertyonly while in actual custody”—which means in arms, cages, or confinement. An able critic, and a very well-informed lawyer, says: “Any respectable court would laugh at the proposition that it is not theft to appropriate a diamond which has escaped from the owner’s custody.” But that is another kind of cow—the poor have dogs, notdiamonds. Still the learned man is to be admired who said:
“I like dogs because I know so many men and women.
“I like dogs because they always see my virtues and ignore my vices.
“I like dogs because they are friends throughgood report and evil report—through poverty and through riches.
“I like dogs because they are faithful and generous.
“I like dogs because they are full of simplicity and find pleasure in very little things.”
The population of the early settlements of Ohio bought and sold dogs, and considered them as much property as horses, cattle, or other personalty. They were not purchased by the pound; neither were hogs nor cattle. Among traders of the rural districts, every thing weighing over five hundred pounds was bought and sold upon appearance and opinion, by the piece.
Where the price caused a disagreement between buyer and seller, some mutual friend, who had obtained a good reputation as guesser, would be called as an arbiter. Fattened cattle to go east, purchased by “drovers,” were never weighed, but were taken, like horses, at a given sum per head. Fattened hogs, however, were generally weighed, by request of the purchaser. Each hog would be suspended, and weight determined by the “steelyard,” and then branded with a redhot iron on the left ham. This done, the squealing prisoner would surrender his place and attentions of the audience to the next, and so on, until the whole drove became duly registered. But farmers trading among themselves, buying and selling stock, depended entirely upon their sight and judgment as to the valuation.