575
(2) Such order may be made either against the owner or against any person appearing to have the custody, control or care of the dog.
(3) If the person against whom the order is made fails to comply therewith he shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding ten dollars for every day on which he fails to comply therewith.
5. Every person who contravenes any provision of Penalty. any regulation made under this Ordinance shall upon summary conviction be liable to a fine not exceeding two hundred and fifty dollars.
6. The following enactments are repealed :-
Repeal of Ordinance
(a) The Summary Offences Ordinance, 1845, sec- No. 1 of 1845,
tions 16 (3) and 17.
(b) The Dogs Ordinance, 1893.
ss. 16 (3) and 17, and Ordinance
No. 5 of 1893
Objects and Reasons,
*
dog
39
1. The present Dogs Ordinance, Ordinance No. 5 of 1893, defines the term
as excluding puppies under the age of three months. This definition was probably adopted because for licensing, and other pur- poses of general control, puppies may be excluded. For the purpose however, of suppression of rabies it is important to have control over dogs of all ages. The chief object of this bill is to amend the definition of the term "dog" so as to include dogs of all ages.
2. The Ordinance in question is open to minor objections on the ground of form and coutent. For example, it contains provisions which nowadays gene- rally appear in regulations. Further, the regulations section is somewhat diffuse. Again, section 8 of the Ordinance does not create any offence but merely gives a power of arrest and for that purpose it is unnecessary in view of section 26 of Ordinance No. 11 of 1900.
3. It was decided to take the opportunity of remedy- ing these defects. The bill therefore repeals the old Ordinance and re-enacts the necessary provisions. The maximum penalty is raised from $100 to $250 in accordance with the modern practice with regard to minor summary offences.
4. Section 16 (3) of the Summary Offences Ordi- nance, 1815, is repealed because the question of stray dogs will be dealt with in the regulations to be made · under this Ordinance. Sub-sections (1) and (2) of section 16 of the Summary Offences Ordinance, 1845, are being allowed to stand because they deal with animals generally and do not refer to dogs only. Sec- tion 17 of that Ordinance is repealed because the section has been transferred to this Ordinance, where it appears as section 4.
5. A draft of the proposed regulations is published at the same time as this bill,
20th October, 1927.
J. H. KEMP,
Attorney General,