1. “Trial of Arab Charged with Firing at Jewish Bus,” Palestine Post, February 23, 1938, 2; and “Arab Sentenced to Death in Jerusalem: Convicted for Firing at Jewish Bus,” Palestine Post, February 24, 1938, 2.

2. “Death Sentence for Murderer who Threw Bomb in Haifa,” Hatzofeh (in Hebrew), March 22, 1939, 4; and “Five Years for 13 Rounds,” Palestine Post, January 5, 1938, 3.

3. “Has Caught You At Last: Two Arabs Sentenced to Death for Murder of Mendel Mintz,” Palestine Post, December 15, 1937, 1; and “Villager Sentenced to Death for Firing,” Palestine Post, April 29, 1938, 2.

4. Ambage, Norman and Clark, Michael, “‘Unbuilt Bloomsbury’: Medico-Legal Institutes and Forensic Science Laboratories in England Between the Wars,” in Legal Medicine in History, eds. Clark, Michael and Crawford, Catherine (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994), 293Google Scholar. See also Smith, Sydney, “Medicolegal Institute, Cairo, Egypt,” Methods & Problems of Medical Education, Ninth Series (New York: Rockefeller Foundation, 1928)Google Scholar.

5. Ambage and Clark, “Unbuilt Bloomsbury,” 293, 299.

6. For the history of fingerprinting, see Sengoopta, Chandak, Imprint of the Raj: How Fingerprinting Was Born in Colonial India (London: Macmillan, 2003)Google Scholar; Cole, Simon A., Suspect Identities: A History of Fingerprinting and Criminal Identification (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2001), 60–96 Google Scholar. For tool marking, see Smith, Sydney, “The Identification of Firearms and Projectiles,” British Medical Journal (January 1926): 8–10 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

7. For a critique of the scientific foundation of “pattern identification disciplines,” see Mnookin, Jennifer L., Cole, Simon A., Dror, Itiel E., Fisher, Barry A. J., Houck, Max, Inman, Keith, Kaye, David H., Koehler, Jonathan J., Langenburg, Glenn, Risinger, D. Michel, Rudin, Norah, Siegel, Jay, and Stoney, David A., “The Need for a Research Culture in the Forensic Sciences,” UCLA Law Review 58 (2011): 725Google Scholar. For a discussion of how certain kinds of expertise adopted scientific trappings to acquire admittance into American courts, see Mnookin, Jennifer, “Scripting Expertise: The History of Handwriting Identification Evidence and the Judicial Construction of Expertise,” Virginia Law Review 87 (2001): 1723–1845 Google Scholar.

8. For a discussion of “forensic culture” from a historical perspective, see Burney, Ian, Kirby, David A., Pemberton, Neil, “Introducing Forensic Cultures,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 44 (2013): 1–3 Google Scholar.  For a preliminary sketch of how colonialism helped shape “forensic culture” see Hamlin, Christopher, “Forensic Culture in Historical Perspective: Technologies of Witness, Testimony, Judgment (and Justice?)” Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 44 (2013): 4–15 Google Scholar.

9. Pemberton, Neil, “‘Bloodhounds as Detective’: Dogs, Slum Stench and Late-Victorian Murder Investigation,” Cultural and Social History 10 (2013): 69–91 Google Scholar.

10. For a discussion of how Utilitarians used India to advance ideas that were considered too dangerous or too revolutionary for England, see Stokes, Eric, The English Utilitarians and India (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1959)Google Scholar.

11. Cole, Suspect Identities, 6–31. For a discussion of how this process was reflected in detective fiction, see Friedman, Lawrence and Rosen-Zvi, Issachar, “Illegal Fictions: Mystery Novels and the Popular Image of Crime,” UCLA Law Review 48 (2000–2001): 1411–30Google Scholar, at 1423–24.

12. See, for example, Smith, Sydney, Forensic Medicine: A Text-Book for Students and Practitioners (Philadelphia: P. Blakiston's Son & Co., 1925), 471Google Scholar (“Motive, which plays so Prominent a part in connection with Western crime, is often difficult to understand in the East, for murders of an extremely revolting nature may have what appears to be a most insignificant motive.”)

13. For a discussion of the seeming irrationality of crime in the Middle East, see Goadby, Frederic M., Commentary on Egyptian Criminal Law and the Related Criminal Law of Palestine, Cyprus and Iraq (Cairo: Government Press, 1924), 18–20 Google Scholar. For a literary treatment of the irrationality of foreign crime in the work of Conan Doyle, see Thomas, Ronald R., Detective Fiction and the Rise of Forensic Science (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999)Google Scholar, in particular ch. 13 (“Foreign Bodies in A Study in Scarlet and The Sign of Four.)”

14. “NSF Awards $15 Million to Crack the Olfactory Code,” National Science Foundation, September 21, 2015. http://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=136333 (accessed June 1, 2017); “Scientists Win $6.4 Million to Crack the Code of Smell Navigation,” Berkeley News (Online), September 24, 2015. http://news.berkeley.edu/2015/09/24/smell-navigation-grant/ (accessed June 1, 2017) (“Olfaction is one of the last frontiers of neuroscience, the least understood of the five senses”).

15. Homer, , The Odyssey, trans. Fagles, Robert (New York: Penguin, 1996), 364Google Scholar.

16. Sir Scott, Walter, Talisman (New York: Feather Trail Press, 2009)Google Scholar, ch. 24, 140.

17. Sir Doyle, Arthur Conan, The Sign of Four, in The Complete Sherlock Holmes (New York: Doubleday, 1960), 115Google Scholar.

18. Ibid., 119.

19. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, The Adventure of Shascombe Old Place, in The Complete Sherlock Holmes, 1101.

20. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Silver Blaze, in The Complete Sherlock Holmes, 335.

21. Cole, Suspect Identities, in particular ch. 1 (“Impostors and Incorrigible Rogues”). For the manifestation of such anxieties in Victorian fiction, see Thomas, Detective Fiction, 63.

22. Pemberton, “Bloodhounds as Detectives,” 70.

23. Sloane, Charles F., “Dogs In War, Police Work and Patrol,” Journal of Criminology and Police Science 46 (1955): 385–95Google Scholar, at 391. To the extent that the police employed dogs, they were used only to track known individuals (such as fugitives) or to accompany them on patrol.

24. Pemberton, Neil, “Hounding Holmes: Arthur Conan Doyle, Bloodhounds and Sleuthing in the Late-Victorian Imagination,” Journal of Victorian Culture 17 (2012): 454–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 455; Pemberton, Neil, “The Bloodhound's Nose Knows? Dogs and Detection in Anglo-American Culture.” Endeavour 37(4) (2013): 196–208 Google Scholar, at 196.

25. “The Bloodhound Question,” The Standard (London) October 8, 1888.

26. Craig, Wallace, “The Dog as Detective,” Scientific Monthly 18 (1924): 38–47 Google Scholar; Warden, C.J. and Warner, L.H., “The Sensory Capacities and Abilities of Dogs,” Quarterly Review of Biology 3 (1928): 1–28 Google Scholar.

27. On the significance of odor in Victorian England, see Reinarz, Jonathan, Past Scents: Historical Perspectives on Smell (Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press, 2014), 166CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

28. “What Every Dog Knows,” Palestine Post, December 30, 1934.

29. Allen, Grant, Physiological Aesthetics (London: Henry S. King & Co. 1877), 83Google Scholar. See also, Carlisle, Janice, Common Scents: Comparative Encounters in High Victorian Fiction (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), 27CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

30. Edwin Brough, “The English Bloodhound,” The Standard (London), October 8, 1888 (“I find that most people have the impression that the Bloodhound is a savage, treacherous brute. I think that this idea is the result of recollections of ‘Uncle Tom's Cabin,’ ‘Dred’ and books of that kind. The Cuban Bloodhound, which was used for slave hunting, was a savage animal… but this is quite a different breed to our Bloodhound…”). See also, Pemberton, “Bloodhound's Nose”; Pemberton, “Bloodhounds as Detective.” For an analysis of how this image endured well into the late 1930s, see “The Delicate Bloodhound,” Times, (London) March 3, 1938, 15.

31. “Bloodhounds as Detectives,” Evening Telegraph (Sheffield), October 8, 1888, 1.

32. Supporters of bloodhounds’ employment sometimes referred to them as “Sleuth Hounds” to both avoid their association with the Cuban Bloodhound and their sanguine connotations. “Bloodhounds as Detectives,” Evening Telegraph (Sheffield), October 8, 1888, 1.

33. Brough, Edwin, “The English Bloodhound,” Standard (London), October 8, 1888, 2Google Scholar (“The Cuban Bloodhound, which was used for slave hunting, was a savage animal… but this is quite a different breed to our Bloodhound.”); “The Old English Bloodhound,” Liverpool Mercury, October 9, 1888, 5 (“Our English Bloodhound is infinitely superior.”); and “Fallacies About the Bloodhound,” Evening Telegraph (Sheffield), December 27, 1888.

34. “Sir Charles Warren Hunted by Bloodhounds: Experiments in Hyde Park,” Evening Telegraph (Sheffield) October 9, 1888, 3.

35. “A Ballad of Bloodhounds,” Pall Mall Gazette, October 9, 1888, 5.

36. “Bloodhounds as Detectives,” Evening Telegraph (Sheffield), October 8, 1888, 1.

37. Pemberton, “Bloodhound's Nose,” 207; and Pemberton, “Bloodhounds as Detective,” 87.

38. “Reporter Versus Bloodhound—Exciting Chase in the City: How Criminals are Tracked,” The Natal Witness (Pietermaritzburg), Saturday, August 21, 1909; and “K-9 100,” e-Nongqai 2 (2011), 11. Available at: https://issuu.com/hennieheymans/docs/enongqai_2_vol_8c_k-9_100_ (accessed June 1, 2017).

39. “The Hound in Peace and War,” Nongqai, June 1910, 469; and Marius de Witt Dippenaar, A History of the South African Police, (Silverton: Promedia Publications, 1988), 41.

40. National Archives of South Africa (hereafter: NASA) JUS/136/25435.10 (Acting Commissioner Bredell to Transvaal Police, March 28, 1911).

41. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines spoor as “a trace by which the progress of someone or something may be followed.”

42. NASA SAP/66/CONF/8.665 (Secretary of Transvaal Police to Office of the Commandant Depot, November 15, 1911).

43. Ibid.

44. de Villiers, I.P., “Dogs as Detectives in South Africa,” Police Journal 2 (1929): 188–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 190; NASA JUS/863/1.140.25 (Sub-Inspector in Charge, C.I.D, Bulaway, 4.9.1913): “Steps were then taken to obtain the services of a class of dog which would work successfully under the climatic conditions in this Province.” Two police officers then in England were dispatched to the Continent “to obtain full information and, if considered advisable, purchase three Police dogs.” After visiting Germany, France, Belgium, and Holland, they returned with two trained and one untrained Doberman Pinschers at the cost of £18 and £30 per head, depending on pedigree and training.

45. Shear, Keith, “Police Dogs and State Rationality in Early Twentieth Century South Africa,” in Canis Africanis: A History of Dogs in Southern Africa, eds. van Sittert, Lance and Swart, Sandra (Leiden: Brill, 2008), 193–216 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 208.

46. de Villiers, “Dogs as Detectives,” 189.

47. Dippenaar, A History of the South African Police, 41; “K-9 100,” 11.

48. de Villiers, “Dogs as Detectives,” 189.

49. Sloane, “Dogs In War,” 390.

50. Shear, “Police Dogs and State Rationality,” 207.

51. Dippenaar, A History of the South African Police, 41.

52. de Villiers, “Dogs as Detectives,” 188.

53. Ibid., 192.

54. NASA SAP 92/1/3/23/2. An anonymous letter sent to the police claimed that Sub-Inspector Donald of Hospital Hill had authored a number of unfavorable accounts of the tracking dogs, believing that “these police dogs must be done away with.” (anonymous to Officer in Charge, Police Kennels Irene, November 10, 1918).

55. NASA SAP 92/1/3/23/2 (Deputy Commissioner of Police, Johannesburg, to Secretary, SAP, January 12, 1918).

56. NASA SAP 95/21/99/26. (Spicer to Colonial Secretary, Nairobi, September 10, 1927). This case continued to haunt the force for some time, and was discussed in the 1937 Inquiry into the South African Police.

57. See G.H.R. Police Dogs: The Wrong Kind Used—Waste of Public Money,” Star (Johannesburg) June 29, 1918 (discussing the dogs’ misidentification of two children and the general inability of Dobermans to track).

58. Interim and Final Reports of the Commission of Inquiry Appointed by His Excellency the Governor-General to Inquire into Certain Matters Concerning the South African Police and the South African Railways and Harbours Police (Pretoria: Government Printer, 1937) (hereafter 1937 Report), 69. Still, the Commission of Inquiry noted that since 1919, “training and control of the dogs has vastly improved.”

59. Lloyd, H.S., “The Value of Dogs to the Police,” Police Journal 13 (1940): 206–22Google Scholar, at 209.

60. 1937 Report, 69.

61. Chanock, Martin, The Making of South African Legal Culture, 1902–1936: Fear, Favor and Prejudice (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001), 51Google Scholar. Throughout its early years, the SAP struggled with policing the vast territory with only a small police force, but this became particularly challenging during the Great War, as many were recruited for military service.

62. “The Hound in Peace and War,” Nongqai, June 1910, 469.

63. Ibid.

64. Ibid.

65. On the relation between odor and otherness, see Reinarz, Jonathan, Past Scents: Historical Perspectives on Smell (Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press, 2014)Google Scholar, in particular ch. 3 (“Odorous Others: Race and Smell”).

66. NASA JUS 863 1/139/25 (“Reports on Work Done By Police Dogs,” 31.12.1922)

67. 1937 Report, 63.

68. Ibid., 67.

69. Ibid., 64.

70. Ibid., 63.

71. Ibid., 63.

72. David Anderson, “Stock Theft and Moral Economy in Colonial Kenya,” Africa 56 (1986): 399–416.

73. Ibid.

74. Marshall, Henrietta Elizabeth, “The Great Witch Doctor,” in Our Empire Story: Stories of India and the Greater Colonies (London: Jack Ltd. 1908)Google Scholar

75. 1937 Report, 63; and NASA JUS 822/1/403/24 (Secretary, Free State Agricultural Society to Secretary for Justice, September 29, 1924, requesting that dogs be dispatched to assist in tracking stock thieves).

76. See above, 69. The Report explained that much like the liquor laws and location restrictions, the laws against stock theft were considered by Africans to be tailored for natives only. All such restrictions broadened the chasm between the police and the native population. As the Report noted, “natives regard the police as enemies and persecutors rather than protectors and friends.”

77. Legassick, Martin, “From Prisoners to Exhibits: Representations of Bushmen of the Northern Cape, 1880–1900,” in Rethinking Settler Colonialism: History and Memory in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and South Africa, ed. Coombes, Annie E. (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2006), 63–99 Google Scholar, at 72.

78. Chanock, South African Legal Culture, at 117. As will be discussed, this did not entirely obviate or prevent the imposition of collective punishment in South Africa or elsewhere. For a discussion of this dilemma in Kenya: “Parliament: Collective Punishment in Kenya Defended,” The Times (London, England) November 27, 1952. Goadby, Commentary on Egyptian Criminal Law, 319 (discussing “the abandonment of the ‘primitive but effectual’ methods which formerly existed of enforcing a sort of communal responsibility for crime.” Goadby discusses how this “has directly tended to enhance the difficulties in the way of its suppression and detection, though…the advance of civilization has made such abandonment necessary.”)

79. For discussions concerning the allocation of dogs to areas most affected by stock theft, see NASA JUS 822/1/403/24 (Commissioner of Police to Secretary for Justice, December 27, 1923; April 23, 1924; August 23, 1924; October 21, 1926).

80. Gordon, Robert J., “Fido: Dog Tales of Colonialism in Namibia,” in Canis Africanis: A Dog History of Southern Africa, eds. van Sittert, Lance and Swart, Sandra (Leiden: Brill, 2008), 173–92Google Scholar, at 188 (“It was an article of faith that Africans were by nature scared of dogs, even if everyone repeated stories about thieves poisoning fierce dogs or making friends with them.”) For a discussion of dogs’ cultural significance in late nineteenth and early twentieth century Africa see Mitchell, Peter, “The Canine Connection II: Dogs and Southern African Herders,” Southern African Humanities 26 (2014): 1–19 Google Scholar, at 13; Maclean, John, A Compendium of Kafir Laws and Customs (London: Cass, 1968; first edition 1858), at 91–95 Google Scholar; Hunter, Monica, Reaction to Conquest: Effects of Contact with Europeans on the Pondo of South Africa (London: Oxford University Press, 1936), 275Google Scholar (enumerating dogs among the “witch familiars,” beings that appear as humans or animals and with which those engaged in witchcraft have “sexual conexion and by means of which they illegally destroy life and property.”); and Eileen Jensen Krige, The Social System of the Zulus (Pietermaritzburg: Shuter & Shooter, 1957; [first ed. 1936]), 325.

For an analysis of dog's liminal nature in the European imagination, see Aaron Herald Skabelund, Empire of Dogs: Canines, Japan and the Making of the Modern Imperial World (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2011), 6–7 (“As creatures of metaphor, dogs oscillate between high-status animals and low-status people. They are said simultaneously to possess admirable traits (such as bravery) that make them akin to humans and despicable attributes (such as filth) that render them unalterably inferior—or in the minds of some, like ‘Other’ humans.”)

81. NASA JUS 863/1/139/25 (“Reports on Work Done by Police Dogs,” October 2, 1914)

82. NASA SAP 95/21/99/26 (Spicer to Colonial Secretary Nairobi, September 10, 1927).

83. Shear, “Police Dogs and State Rationality,” 210.

84. For a sociohistorical analysis of the relationship between dogs and social control throughout history, particularly in colonial settings, see Lilly, J. Robert and Puckett, Michael B., “Social Control and Dogs: A Sociohistorical Analysis,” Crime and Delinquency 43 (1997): 123–47Google Scholar. As Lilly and Puckett note, Doberman Pinschers in particular were not only bred to discipline, but also physical features such as their ears and tails were artificially manipulated to enhance their intimidating appearance. For a discussion of how the British employed dogs to track and maul suspects during the Mau Mau Rebellion, see “Mau Mau Raids Near Mount Kenya,” Times, September 27, 1952, 6. See also: Elkins, Caroline, Imperial Reckoning: The Untold Story of Britain's Gulag in Kenya (New York: Henry Holt, 2005)Google Scholar, 86 (recounting how one interrogator “set his dog at the old fellow. The animal got him to the ground, ripped open his throat, and started mauling his chest and arms. In spite of his screams, my companions just grinned. It was five minutes before the dog was called off.”)

85. Luongo, Katherine, Witchcraft and Colonial Rule in Kenya, 1900–1955 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011), 88–89 Google Scholar.

86. Ibid., 91.

87. For a discussion of perceptions of colonial government as a form of witchcraft see Crais, Clifton, The Politics of Evil: Magic, State Power, and the Political Imagination in South Africa (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002)Google Scholar.

88. See Anderson, David, Histories of the Hanged: The Dirty War in Kenya and the End of Empire (New York: W.W. Norton, 2005), 239Google Scholar (describing how the loyalist Home Guard was scornfully referred to by their rivals as “the running dogs of British Imperialism” and how Kikuyu rebels nailed headless dogs to government notice boards). For a discussion of dog's significance in postcolonial literature, see Woodward, Wendy, “Social Subjects: Representations of Dogs in South African Fiction in English,” in Canis Africanis: A Dog History of Southern Africa, eds. van Sittert, Lance and Swart, Sandra (Leiden: Brill, 2008), 235–62Google Scholar; and Williams, Patrick, Ngugi Wa Thiong'o (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1999), 71Google Scholar (discussing how in Thiong'o's A Grain of Wheat, African Lieutenant K's rape of white Dr. Lynd is replaced by the killing of her dog). See also, Nicholls, Brendon, Ngugi Wa Thiong'o, Gender, and the Ethics of Postcolonial Reading (Burlington: Ashgate, 2010), 110Google Scholar. Against this background, it becomes clear why in 2012 South African President Jacob Zuma referred to black Africans’ ownership of pet dogs as an attempt to “emulate whiteness.” See AP: “South Africa: A Biting Critique of Pets,” New York Times, December 27, 2012, 8. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/28/world/africa/south-africas-president-gives-a-biting-critique-of-pets.html?_r=1 (accessed June 1, 2017).

89. For an analysis of dog's liminal nature in the European imagination, see Skabelund, Aaron Herald, Empire of Dogs: Canines, Japan and the Making of the Modern Imperial World (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2011), 6–7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar (“As creatures of metaphor, dogs oscillate between high-status animals and low-status people. They are said simultaneously to possess admirable traits (such as bravery) that make them akin to humans and despicable attributes (such as filth) that render them unalterably inferior—or in the minds of some, like ‘Other’ humans.”)

90. On the African Bushmen, see Hattersley, Alan, The First South African Detectives (Cape Town: Timmins, 1960), 168Google Scholar (“Bushmen were the finest trackers in the world. Moreover they could maintain existence under conditions of extreme hardship that would kill any civilised man within seventy-two hours. In the field of detection primitive skills may yet play a significant role.”)

91. For a discussion of this motif concerning Native American trackers, see Macdonald, Gina and Macdonald, Andrew, Shaman or Sherlock? The Native American Detective (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2002)Google Scholar.

92. For a discussion of how domestication corrupted the Arab “noble savage” see Dodge, Toby, Inventing Iraq: The Failure of Nation Building and a History Denied (New York: Columbia University Press, 2005)Google Scholar. For a similar discussion of how bloodhounds may have “lost their nose,” see Lloyd, H.S., “The Value of Dogs to the Police,” Police Journal 13 (1940): 206–22Google Scholar, at 210.

93. R. v. Kotcho, 1918 (Eastern Districts Local Division) 91–107. Similarly, a Canadian judge wrote: “Let it be supposed that the most skillful of these [natives] was employed to track the murderer, and that he had followed courses such as those taken by the dogs.” For Canada, see R. v. White (British Columbia) 1926, 5 D.L.R. 2.

94. When describing the work of his Sudanese tracker Ibrahim, Len Hynds, a British military policeman serving near the Suez Canal, explained: “As I was making notes as to what had been taken, Ibrahim was circling around, sniffing the ground like a dog.” Len A. Hynds, “Ibrahim—the Sudanese Tracker, n.d. http://www.thespeechlesspoet.co.uk/true%20stories/desert/Ibrahim%20-%20The%20Sudanese%20Tracker.html” (accessed June 1, 2017).

95. National Archives of the United Kingdom (hereafter NAUK) CO 733/246/12 (Spicer to Chief Secretary of Palestine, April 11, 1933).

96. Bennett, Huw, Fighting the Mau Mau: The British Army and Counterinsurgency in Kenya (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012), 27Google Scholar.

97. NAUK CO 822/478 (“Use of Wind Scenting Dogs Provided by Colonel Baldwin, a Dog Breeder, by the Kenya Police During the Emergency,” 1953).

98. Shadle, Brett L., “Cruelty and Empathy, Animal and Race, in Colonial Kenya,” Journal of Social History 45 (2012): 1097–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 1099.

99. Skabelund, Empire of Dogs, 7.

100. I refer here solely to the evidentiary aspect, rather than to the procedural question of the circumstances under which the police could be allowed to employ dogs, which is beyond the scope of this article. The legality of the search itself was a question addressed in South Africa in Jan Mentor v. The Union Government (Supreme Court, Cape of Good Hope provincial Division, May 18, 1926) a suit for damages caused in the course of a dog search. See NASA JUS/822/1/403/24.

101. Shear, “Police Dogs and State Rationality,” 197.

102. NASA JUS 863/1/139/25 (“Reports on Work Done by Police Dogs,” RCI 6 and RCI 40 of January 20, 1918; RCI 10 of March 1, 1919).

103. NASA JUS 863/1/139/25 (in particular RCI 2 of November 27, 1918; RCI 10 of March 1, 1919).

104. NASA SAP 92/1/3/23/2 (Office of the Commandant to Commissioner of South African Police, October 16, 1928).

105. See Menzel, Rudolphine, Dog Education and Training (Palestine: Lanotter, 1939)Google Scholar.

106. R. v. Kotcho, 1918 (Eastern Districts Local Division) 91–107.

107. NASA SAP/92/1/3/23/2 (Secretary, South African Police, April 11, 1918, citing R. v. Dartheus [Heidelberg] and R. v. Sokkins [Pretoria]).

108. R. v. Kotcho, 1918 (Eastern Districts Local Division) 91–107.

109. “Use of Police Dogs—Is Their Evidence Admissible? Interesting Argument in Supreme Court,” Grocott's Penny Mail, April 17, 1918 (newspaper clipping available in NASA SAP 92/1/3/23/2).

110. R. v. Kotcho, 91.

111. Ibid.

112. See also: “Movements of Police Dogs,” Rand Daily Mail (Johannesburg), Saturday, May 11, 1918. “Police Dogs Not ‘Evidence’” Rand Daily Mail (Johannesburg), May 22, 1918) (newspaper clipping available in NASA SAP 92/1/3/23/2).

113. NASA SAP 92/1/3/23/2 (District Commandant, Marico, to Deputy Commissioner, S.A.P. Transvaal Division, Pretoria, 7.10.1919).

114. R. v. Trupedo, 1920 SALR (Appellate Division) 58.

115. Ibid., 64.

116. This aspect of the ruling would be later cited and discussed in Poswa v. Christie 1934 SALR (Natal Provincial Division, June 13, 1934), 178. The case involved the behavior of sheep to prove their ownership.

117. R. v. Trupedo, 63.

118. Ibid.

119. Ibid. In a sense, Innes's opinion echoed a distinction made by some between dogs and hounds. See, for example Lloyd, “The Value of Dogs,” 206. (“A dog when once he gets to like his handler and is properly trained, works for the pure love of pleasing his handler… The hound, on the other hand, seems to work entirely on his own, by inherited instinct, and has little or no affection for his handler, or any desire to please him, but hunts to please himself.”)

120. Ibid., 63.

121. de Villiers, “Dogs as Detectives.” The legitimacy of such a use was specifically singled out by Judge Graham in Kotcho. See NASA SAP 92/1/3/23/2 (Secretary, South African Police to all S.A. Police units concerned, July 13, 1918).

122. Chanock, South African Legal Culture, at 123.

123. For a discussion of such employment of the dogs, see “Evidence of Police Dogs,” Star (Johannesburg) March 6, 1925.

124. 1937 Report, 68; and Chanock, South African Legal Culture, 254.

125. Shear, “Police Dogs and State Rationality,” 205.

126. NASA SAP 386/21/19/46 (“Police Dogs: Rhodesian Police,” 1918–1960).

127. NASA SAP 95/21/99/26 (“Police Dogs: Kenya Police,” 1927–1947).

128. NAUK CO 733/246/12 (de Villiers to Spicer, March 10, 1933).

129. “The Union's World Famous Police Dogs,” Nongqai 9 (1939): 901Google Scholar. The dog unit of the North Western Frontier in India was established in 1939.

130. Lieutenant-Colonel W. Marsh, “Dogs in Jungle War,” NASA SAP 296/21/22/38.

131. NASA SAP 296/21/22/38 (“Police Dogs: New South Wales Police” 1938–1945).

132. Shear, “Police Dogs and State Rationality,” 205.

133. “Disturbances” is the British term used by the British. In Hebrew the events are commonly referred to as P'raot Tarpat (1929 Pogroms). In Arabic they are known as Thawrat al-Buraq (“The Wall Revolt”).

134. See Palestine Blue Book for 1929 (Jerusalem: Government Printer, 1930), 343Google Scholar.

135. Israel State Archives (hereafter ISA) P 758/4 (“Report on the Scope, Character and Result of the Judicial Proceedings Upon the August 1929 Riots in Palestine”).

136. See Kolinsky, Martin, Law, Order and Riots in Mandatory Palestine, 1928–1935  (London: St. Martin's Press, 1993, 100–101 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

137. For an analysis of the “Irish Model” and its influence on throughout the Empire, see Anderson, David M. and Killingray, David, eds. Policing the Empire: Government, Authority and Control, 1830–1940 (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1991)Google Scholar, ch. II in particular.

138. Kroizer, Gad, “From Dowbiggin to Tegart: Revolutionary Change in the Colonial Police in Palestine During the 1930s,” Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History 32 (2004): 115–33Google Scholar.

139. Ibid., 120.

140. Ibid., 119.

141. Ibid., 121. See also: Kolinsky, Law, Order and Riots, 101.

142. Ibid., 471.

143. Ambage and Clark, “Unbuilt Bloomsbury,” 293–94.

144. Ibid. See also Methods & Problems of Medical Education, Ninth Series (New York: Rockefeller Foundation, 1928) (Surveying the forensic laboratories around the world in 1928).

145. Ambage and Clark, “Unbuilt Bloomsbury,” 293–94.

146. NAUK CO 733/246/12 (Wauchope to Cunliffe–Lister, June 21, 1933).

147. See, generally, Cohen, Hillel, Army of Shadows: Palestinian Collaboration with Zionism, 1917–1948 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2008)Google Scholar.

148. “From Town and Country: Training Boxer Dogs,” Palestine Review, April 21, 1939, 6–7.

149. “Arlosoroff Murder Trial—Trackers’ Evidence; Plaster Casts of Footprints,” Palestine Post, May 3, 1934, 7. See also Horace B. Samuel, Who Killed Arlosoroff: A Record of Crime and Justice in the Mandated Territory of Palestine (unpublished, 1934), from 34.

150. A.A. 7/1934 Abraham Stavsky v. Attorney General, Palestine Law Reports 2 (1935): 148, 150–51Google Scholar (“The evidence of the trackers was in many ways unsatisfactory. The undoubted confusion of the tracks which they followed, with tracks showing spur chains that were clearly those of a mounted constable… are enough to make it difficult to accept this evidence, especially in view of the circuitous route followed by the debated tracks… Further, even if the evidence as to tracks on the scene of the crime were unimpeachable, I am satisfied that the foot-print parade on the beach was vitiated by the fact the trackers witnessed the identification parade in the station yard.”)

151. Samuel, “Who Killed Arlosoroff?” 62–76.

152. ISA M/335/10. See also Spicer, R.G.B., “The New Detective,” Police Journal 9 (1936): 245–51Google Scholar.

153. “Police Dogs for Palestine: Officers Return with Trio,” Palestine Post, December 24, 1934, 10.

154. Spicer, “New Detective,” 245.

155. NAUK CO 733/246/12 (Spicer to Chief Secretary, April 11, 1933).

156. NAUK Metropolitan Police (MEPO) 2/4981 (Spicer to Allan, October 16, 1934).

157. Spicer, “New Detective,” 245.

158. Horne, Job Well Done, 456 (“Whenever the dogs had a success, Spicer saw that the fact was widely publicized.”). For examples of such publicity see “Police Use Dogs,” Davar, March 1, 1935, 1; and “Police Dogs in Salame,” Filastin, May 16, 1935, 6.

159. According to reports in the Palestine Post and Filastin, in attendance were journalists from Haaretz, Hayarden,  Davar, Doar Hayom, Al-Jamea Al-Islamiya, Al-Difa'a, Filastin, and the Palestine Post. “How Dogs Assist the Police: Jerusalem Journalists Receive a Lesson in Dog Training for Crime Discovery,” Doar Hayom (in Hebrew), May 10, 1935, 4; “The Police Dogs,” Haaretz, May 5, 1934; J.L. Meltzer, “A Local Departure in Crime Detection: Dogs Used by Palestine Police,” Palestine Post, Thursday, May 9, 1935, 3; and “Police Dogs and Crime Detection: Important Press Demonstration,” Filastin, May 14, 1935, 5. “Police Hounds Capture Thief,” Palestin Post, March 1, 1935, 1.

160. See Robert D. Ottensooser, “The Palestine Pound and the Israel Pound: Transition From a Colonial to an Independent Currency.”

161. “Police Use Dogs,” Davar, March 1, 1935, 1.

162. “Crime-Dogs Solve Crimes,” Al-Difa'a, May 9, 1935, 7.

163. “A Local Departure in Crime Detection: Dogs Used by Palestine Police,” Palestine Post, Thursday, May 9, 1935, 3; and “How Dogs Assist the Police: Jerusalem Journalists Receive a Lesson in Dog Training for Crime Discovery,” Doar Hayom, May 10, 1935, 4.

164. Horne, Job Well Done, 458.

165. Ibid.

166. Ibid. See also: “Police Dog Tracks Robbers: ‘Kim’ Follows Scent for 6 Kilometers,” Palestine Post, September 24, 1945, 3 (The article describes how at dawn Kim followed spoor from the scene where a bus had been held up the previous evening, to the middle of the village of Kaza, where the scent was lost. An identification parade of the village's eleven male inhabitants was then held, where Kim identified Ahmed Hassan.)

167. Report by His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the Council of the League of Nations on the Administration of Palestine and Trans-Jordan for the Year 1935 (London: His Majesty's Stationery Office, 1936)Google Scholar.

168. “Borrowing Palestine Police Dogs,” Palestine Post, October 14, 1935.

169. Ibid.

170. Ibid.

171. Ibid.

172. Horne, Job Well Done, 459.

173. Ibid., 458.

174. “British Constable 1069 Howard Mansfield Recalls His Service in Nablus, Jerusalem and Haifa,” in The Creation of the State of Israel (Perspectives on Modern World History), ed. Immell, Myra (Detroit: Gale, 2010), 159–67Google Scholar. Mansfield served in Palestine from 1946 to 1948. Dogs' precise status in Islam and in Judaism beyond the scope of this article and moves a seperate discussion. Dogs’ status in Islam has been contested for centuries, by some accounts dating back to the Prophet himself. Al-Jahiz explained that dogs were considered impure because they were border crossers: they confused the categories of culture and nature, neither a “wild animal nor a domestic one, neither a human nor a jinn (spirit).” See Katz, Marion Holmes, Body of Text: The Emergence of the Sunni Law of Ritual Purity, (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2002), 19Google Scholar. Still, as the historical work of Alan Mikhail has demonstrated, dogs played a significant role in Egyptian society until the nineteenth century, their impurity notwithstanding. See Mikhail, Alan, The Animal in Ottoman Egypt (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014)Google Scholar, in particular Part II (“In Between”). However, by the twentieth century, dog ownership was generally regarded unfavorably in the Middle East. See El Fadl, Khaled Abou, “Dogs in the Islamic Tradition and Nature,” in Encyclopedia of Religion and Nature (New York: Thoemmes Continuum, 2005)Google Scholar. El Fadl asserts that dog ownership was largely reserved for Bedouins, who used dogs for protection and herding, and for Westernized elites, for whom dogs symbolized “Europeanization.” Dogs’ status was similarly contested in Judaism: Deuteronomy prohibited offerings funded by the “hire of a whore or the price of a dog.” Dogs were often described as foolish, carcass-eating, bloodthirsty creatures. As in some African traditions, in the Bible, a dog's howling represented a bad omen of death. See Sophia Menache, “From Unclean Species to Man's Best Friend: Dogs in the Biblical, Mishnaic, and Talmud Periods”; and Schwartz, Joshua, “Good Dog—Bad Dog: Jews and Their Dogs in Ancient Jewish Society,” in A Jew's Best Friend? The Image of the Dog Throughout Jewish History, ed. Lieberman-Ackerman, Phillip and Zalashik, Rakefet (Brighton: Sussex Academic Press, 2013)Google Scholar. In Europe, Jews were widely believed to suffer from an irrational fear of dogs, and dog ownership was generally discouraged. As a Yiddish adage suggests, “if a Jew has a dog, either the dog is no dog or the Jew is no Jew.” See Robert A. Rothstein, “’If a Jew Has a Dog…’: Dogs in Yiddish Proverbs,” in A Jew's Best Friend? By the twentieth century, however, Jewish attitudes towards dog were undergoing a conscious refashioning, at least in some circles. Through a stronger bond with the land and with nature—including animals— the Zionist movement sought to forge a new Jewish identity. Dogs were casted to play a key role in the plan for creating a braver, closer to nature, “New Jew.” See Rudolphine Menzel, Dog Education.

175. Segev, Tom, One Palestine Complete: Jews and Arabs Under the British Mandate (New York: Henry Holt & Co. 2000), 197Google Scholar. This changed dramatically by 1938: adjacent to the new Government House a dog cemetery was erected. Ibid., 342.

176. “The Criminal Investigation Department's Amazing Dogs,” Al-Difa'a, May 14, 1935, 4; “News of Border Crime: Dogs Detect Culprits,” Filastin, April 4, 1935, 5; “Crime Discovered by the Police Dogs: Tree Cutting in Ramallah,” Filastin, March 14, 1935; “Dogs Discover Tree Cutting Crime: Track Culprit to Mosque Gates,” Filastin, April 2, 1935; “Police Dogs in Salame,” Filastin, May 16, 1935, 6; and Assad A-Shakiri, “The Barks of Our Dogs and the Activity of the Foreign Dogs,” Filastin, June 23, 1935, 5. Still, some were skeptical as to whether the dogs provided sufficient deterrence and proposed more severe punishment for agricultural crimes. See “Police Dogs and the Custom of Tree Cutting,” Filastin, April 10, 1935, 2.

177. “Crime-Dogs Solve Crimes,” Al-Difa'a, May 9, 1935; “They Set Fire to Fields and Forests, Chop Down Trees, Throw Stones and Bombs—Yet the Government Remains Silent,” Davar, May 4, 1936, 1. Some suggested in jest that the dogs be given their share in rewards for wanted persons, also suggesting that a pension fund be established for their benefit. See “Haifa Notebook,” Palestine Post, May 17, 1938, 6.

178. Horne, Job Well Done, 458; J.L. Meltzer, “Local Departure in Crime Detection”, Palestine Post, May 9, 1935, 3. (“The animals appear at their best in agrarian crimes or malicious injury to property…”); and “Destruction of Trees,” Palestine Post, 18 October 1935, 4 (“The cutting of the trees of one's enemy is still a common type of revenge in the Tulkarem district, despite the success of the police dogs in tracking down offenders.”). This was at least one of their intended uses when brought to Palestine. See NAUK CO 733/246/12 (Wauchope to Cunliffe-Lister, June 21, 1933, mentioning particularly “treecutting [sic] and animal maiming in Arab as well as Jewish villages.”).

179. “Suppressing a Savage Crime,” Palestine Post, June 4, 1935, 4. The article was written after the dogs reportedly tracked down a man who, in an act of revenge, stabbed a mare belonging to the Sheikh of the Sakne tribe.

180. See, for example, Goadby, Commentary on Egyptian Criminal Law, 320 (“crimes of vengeance such as murder, wounding and malicious injuries to property are far more common in Egypt, while in the case of acquisitive crimes such as theft and the like the difference [between England and Egypt] is less startling.”); and Smith, Sydney, Mostly Murder (New York: D. McKay Co., 1959), 65Google Scholar. (“It is perhaps a sign of civilisation and progress that in more advanced communities crimes of revenge tend to be greatly outnumbered by crimes committed for gain.”)

181. Smith, Forensic Medicine, 471 (“Motive, which plays so prominent a part in connection with Western crime, is often difficult to understand in the East, for murders of an extremely revolting nature may have what appears to be a most insignificant motive.”)

182. “Suppressing a Savage Crime,” Palestine Post, June 4, 1935.

183. Estimates vary and are highly contested, and range between 3,000 and 6,000 Arabs and several hundred Jews and Britons. See Morris, Benny, Righteous Victims: A History of the Zionist Arab Conflict, 1881–2001 (New York: Vintage, 2001), 159–60Google Scholar.

184. Report by His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the Council of the League of Nations on the Administration of Palestine and Trans-Jordan for the Year 1936 (London: His Majesty's Stationery Office, 1937), 121Google Scholar.

185. Horne, Job Well Done, 459.

186. For an analysis of the British use of airplanes in the Middle East, and Iraq in particular, see Satia, Priya, Spies in Arabia: The Cultural Foundations of Britain's Covert Empire in the Middle East (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008)Google Scholar. See also Killingray, David, “‘A Swift Agent of Government’: Air Power in British Colonial Africa, 1916 – 1939,” Journal of African History 25 (1984): 429–44Google Scholar.

187. NAUK CO 822/478 (“Use of Wind Scenting Dogs Provided by Colonel Baldwin, a Dog Breeder, by the Kenya Police During the Emergency,” 1953). See also: “Mau Mau Raids Near Mount Kenya,” Times (London) September 27, 1952, 6.

188. Report on the Administration of Palestine, 1936, at 121.

189. Marsh, “Dogs in Jungle War,” NASA SAP 296/21/22/38.

190. NAUK CO 733/383/75742/77 (Report of Sir Charles Tegart and David Petrie, January 24, 1938) (hereafter Tegart & Petrie Report). Some have mistakenly attributed the introduction of Dobermans to the Tegart Report itself. See Khalili, Laleh and Schwedler, Jillian, “Introduction,” in Policing and Prisons in the Middle East: Formations of Coercion, eds. Khalili, Laleh and Schwedler, Jillian (London: Hurst & Co. 2010) 15Google Scholar.

191. Tegart & Petrie Report.

192. “Investigations into Murder on Beit Jibrin Track: Dogs on Trail of Highwaymen,” Palestine Post, January 12, 1938, 1; and “Several Arrests in Starkey Murder Investigation,” Palestine Post, January 13, 1938, 1.

193. Four additional dogs were purchased in 1937. Report by His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the Council of the League of Nations on the Administration of Palestine and Trans-Jordan for the Year 1937 (London: His Majesty's Stationery Office, 1938), 111Google Scholar.

194. Tegart & Petrie Report.

195. Ibid.

196. Ibid.

197. For a discussion of Bedouin resistance to British rule during the Arab Revolt, see Nasasra, Mansour “The Southern Palestine Bedouin Tribes and British Mandate Relations, 1917–48: Resistance to Colonialism” The Arab World Geographer 14 (2011): 305–35Google Scholar; and Nasasra, Mansour, “Memories from Beersheba: The Bedouin Palestine Police and the Frontiers of Empire,” Bulletin for the Council of British Research in the Levant 9 (2014): 32–38 Google Scholar.

198. Tegart & Petrie Report.

199. Report by His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the Council of the League of Nations on the Administration of Palestine and Trans-Jordan for the year 1938 (London: His Majesty's Stationery Office, 1939), 113Google Scholar.

200. Ibid.

201. “Dogs as Detectives in South Africa,” Argus (Melbourne), October 6, 1934, 6.

202. Horne, Job Well done, 458. See also: “Two gang members killed during attack on cars on road to Nablus,” Davar, July 10, 1938, 3 (Davar was reporting the third incident in which police dogs were targeted); and “After the Dogs,” Palestine Post, November 22, 1937, 6. (“The effectiveness with which the police bloodhounds [sic] have been doing their work has attracted the ire of the gunmen whom they are called upon to track down, often with success.”)

203. ISA M 335/10 (Autopsy Report, March 3, 1938). The analyst added that “The Dog [sic] was employed on a long and arduous trail of some 25 kilos in the Acre Sub-District” and “was off colour on his return and on the sick list from the date of his return.”

204. NAUK CO 733/358/6 (Telegram from High Commissioner to Secretary of State, April 1, 1938).

205. NASA SAP 296/21/22/38 (GRC Baston to Commissioner of Police, New South Wales, 1.9.1938: “Whilst I am always willing to assist other Police Forces in the Empire in the matter of police dogs, I regret exceedingly that at the moment, and for the next eighteen months, I shall be quite unable to spare you any dogs at all owing to the very heavy drain on us by the Palestine Force.”)

206. Ibid. (Minute by Downie, June 20, 1938).

207. Ibid. (Memorandum to Secretary of State, June 20, 1938).

208. Ibid.

209. Ibid. (Chief Secretary to Downie, August 2, 1938). Two dogs and one bitch were purchased for a cost of Reichmark (RM) 475 each (the equivalent of £P. 40).

210. Hughes, Matthew, “The Banality of Brutality: British Armed Forces and the Repression of the Arab Revolt, 1936–1939,” English Historical Review 124 (2009): 313–54Google Scholar. See also: “Attack on Post,” Palestine Post, April 21, 1938, 1; and “Attacks on Traffic” Palestine Post, April 10, 1938, 2.

211. Hughes, “The Banality of Brutality,” 327.

212. Ibid., 346.

213. Ibid., 326.

214. “A Local Departure in Crime Detection: Dogs Used by Palestine Police,” Palestine Post, May 9, 1935, 3.

215. Haganah Archive (hereafter HA) 34/289 (Address by Menzel to Haganah staff, 1939).

216. Menzel, Dog Education, 135.

217. Central Zionist Archive (hereafter CZA) 129/67.

218. Middle East Centre Archive, St. Antony's College, Oxford (hereafter MEC), Jerusalem and East Mission (hereafter J&EM), LXVI/3 (Re: Abdul Hafiz Abdullah et. al.) (“May I humbly point out that so far in the history of investigation in Palestine, whenever police dogs taken [sic] to a parade after having a scent, they have never, I repeat, so far, failed to pick one or more persons out of the parade. One might argue that this is due to the shining detective mentality of our C.I.D. men.  Unfortunately however I know of a case of theft, where dogs after being given scent followed the scent and arrived to a distant village, entered the room an old bling [sic] man and barked at him, meaning to say that this is the person who committed the robbery.”)

219. Ibid.

220. Hughes, “The Banality of Brutality,” 326.

221. Ibid., 318. See also: “Death Sentence for Daylight Shooting,” Palestine Post, June 11, 1939, 2.

222. Compare to the situation in Kenya when dogs were employed: Cr. App. 44/52 Abdullah bin Wendo v. R. 20 East African Court of Appeal (EACA) 166 (1953). The court insisted that at minimum the handlers be available to testify.

223. See for example ISA M 276/22 (The witness testifying at trial was Kassen Eff. Abu Ghazaleh, a member of the Palestine Police, who interrogated the defendant. Concerning the dogs, he testified: “On 17/3/37 at 9:10 in the morning, the accused was put in a parade for identification by the Police dogs. The dog picked him out from amongst 7 persons after it had smelt the odour of the place where the large blood stains were found. The dog recognized him twice. After that, I charged the accused Mohammad Yasseen with the murder.  He denied killing him. He said: ‘I did not kill Shmuel Gottfried and I did not see him.’”)

224. Ibid.

225. The dog's techniques would be less at issue if the defendant confessed, as they often did. See Spicer, “The New Detective,” 249.

226. Criminal Assize 8/36 Said Mustafa Abbas and Jamil Abu Imris v. Attorney General (August 11, 1936).

227. Ibid. The district court judge observed: “This is a queer evidence and it is extraordinarily not bad. The method through which the identification took place, however, is that the two accused were brought to the place of the incident, and their feet may have stepped near the place of the footsteps which are found there, and the dogs may have smelled their footsteps. The Court sees that it is a sign of extreme negligence to permit a suspect person to come near the place in which there is a trace related to the crime, and have the dogs then come and smell its odour.”)They were sentenced to 10 and 15 years’ imprisonment.

228. One possibility is that in the absence of juries, Palestine's judges trusted their professional ability to attach proper weight to such evidence—questionable as it may have been. However, given how cautious Palestine's judges proved to be concerning other formal evidentiary requirements—where they often displayed greater rigidity than English judges presiding over juries—this explanation seems somewhat unlikely. See for example: Criminal Appeal 160/37 Ali Jarad v. Attorney General, 5 Palestine Law Reports, at 111 (1938).

229. ISA M 276/22 (The magistrate decided not to bind the accused over for trial despite the fact that a police dog had picked him out at two separate identification parades based on the smell of a blood pool and a cigarette packet found at the crime scene. Josiah Wedgwood brought the matter to the attention of Parliament when questioning Secretary of State for the Colonies Ormsby-Gore, asking “what further steps are to be taken to put an end to the terrorism in Palestine which prevents convictions being obtained by the police?” The question prompted Orsmby-Gore to take special interest in the case, ordering Palestine's high commissioner to submit a detailed report on it).

230. For the expectation that the judiciary in Palestine be more “helpful, see “Palestine and the Commission,” Times (London), July 23, 1936, 16 (“So far the High Commissioner has not declared martial law; but he may have to adopt this drastic measure, especially if the attitude of some of the Palestine Judicature is not more helpful than it has been hitherto.”). For the exchange between the secretary of state for the Colonies and Chief Justice Michael McDonnell concerning the judiciary's obligation to be “helpful,” see NAUK CO 733/313/1 (letter from Ormsby-Gore to McDonnell, July 9, 1936). For press coverage of McDonnell's forced resignation see “The Chief Justice,” Palestine Post, October 22, 1936 and NAUK CO 733/313/1 (newspaper clippings from October 22, 1936 and onwards).

231. “Palestine and the Commission,” Times (London), July 23, 1936, 16.

232. Cr. App. 44/52 Abdullah bin Wendo v. Reginam  20 EACA 166 (1953).

233. Ibid.  The case involved the murder of a plantation watchman on a very dark night. The court ultimately acquitted the defendant because the victim's unreliable identification and noted that the dog handler had not testified in court, which deemed the dogs’ identification inadmissible in this case. However, the court emphasized that the method itself was admissible provided that certain requirements were met.

234. NAUK HO 45/21003 (newspaper clipping in the archival file).

235. Ibid. (unknown author to Home Secretary, August 30, 1937).

236. Ambage and Clarke, Unbuilt Bloomsbury, 297, 302.

237. NAUK MEPO 2/4981 (de Villiers to Allan, January 9, 1935; Spicer to Allan, November 6, 1934).

238. HO 45/21003 (Report from July 31, 1935: “Some continental countries, notably Germany and Austria, have developed the use of dogs for protective purposes to a very large extent, and the South African Police have by cross-breeding evolved what appears to be a very satisfactory breed for tracking work in that country.”)

239. Ibid.

240. Ibid.

241. Ibid.

242. NAUK MEPO 5/112 (Committees for the Study of Dogs and their Use in Police Work, 1935–1937; undated and unsigned report).

243. Ibid.

244. Ibid.

245. Ibid.

246. Ibid.

247. Ibid. See also: HO 45/21003 (July 31, 1935). The subcommittee was particularly hopeful that attempts at a bloodhound–otterhound cross might in the future prove satisfactory.

248. “Police Dogs in London,” Times (London), May 13, 1938, 13 (reporting the arrival of the first Labradors at Scotland Yard: “Tracking or picking up scent will not be their chief work”); and “Science to Help All Police” Times, February 20, 1940, 5 (explaining that because of the war, the center for dog training and experiment would not be funded).

249. “The Delicate Bloodhound,” Times (London) March 3, 1938, 15.

250. Velten, Hannah, Beastly London: A History of Animals in the City (London: Reaktion Books, 2013), 83Google Scholar.

251. See Skabelund, Aaron, “Breeding Racism: The Imperial Racism of the ‘German’ Shepherd Dog,” Society & Animals 16 (2008), 354–71Google Scholar, at 355 (noting the British Kennel Club's rebranding of the German Shepherd as the “Alsatian” after World War I, because of growing animosity toward Germany).

252. “How Police Dogs Are Trained: Use in Tracking Criminals” Times (London), August 31, 1951, 2 (“The use of dogs to track and arrest criminals started in its present form in 1948.”)

253. “Police Dogs’ Captures” Times (London), July 15, 1947, 2; and “Successes in Use of Police Dogs,” Times, June 17, 1954, 4. For a discussion of “Teddy Boys” as a subculture or tribus, see Bennett, Andy, “Subcultures or Neo-Tribes? Rethinking the Relationship between Youth, Style, and Musical Taste,” Sociology 33 (1999) 599–617 Google Scholar.

254. “Police Ready to Use More Dogs,” Times (London), February 28, 1958, 4.

255. Velten, Beastly London, 83; “New Methods to Combat Crime,” Times, January 2, 1951, 2; “Bandit's Car Found,” Times, August 5, 1949, 4; and “Police Ready to Use More Dogs,” Times (London) February 28, 1958, 4.

256. “’Flying Dog Squad’ for London,” Times (London) December 29, 1962, 6.

257. NAUK MEPO 2/10507 (“Admissibility of Evidence Derived from Use of Tracking Dogs”, 1963–1966).

258. NAUK MEPO 2/9438 (Kalmus to Rymer-Jones, March 26, 1954: “I remember you telling me that when you were in command [in Palestine], police dogs were extensively used and I gather from the daily papers that this is still the case.”)

259. NAUK MEPO 2/9438, (Chief Inspector Peck to Chief Superintendent, July 18, 1953).

260. NAUK MEPO 2/9438 (Kalmus to Peck, July 17, 1953).

261. Galton, Francis, “Anthropological Miscellany: The History of Twins, As a Criterion of the Relative Powers of Nature and Nurture,” Journal of the Anthropological Institute 5 (1875), 391–406 Google Scholar, at 395 (“It would be an interesting experiment of twins who were closely alike to try how far dogs could distinguish them by scent.”)

262. Kalmus, Hans, “The Discrimination by the Nose of the Dog of Individual Human Odours and in Particular of the Odours of Twins,” British Journal of Animal Behavior 3 (1955): 25–31 Google Scholar.

263. On the relationship between odor and otherness, see Reinarz, Jonathan, Past Scents: Historical Perspectives on Smell (Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press, 2014)Google Scholar, in particular ch. 3 (“Odorous Others: Race and Smell”).

264. Ibid. Many of the dogs retrieved the first handkerchief of a family member that they came across. In cases in which the individual's handkerchief was not part of the lineup, they invariably brought back another handkerchief nevertheless.

265. NAUK MEPO 2/10507. The Metropolitan Police's stated policy in the 1960s was that “before a person is arrested as a result of tracking by a police dog, there should be some other supporting evidence available.” It was anticipated that otherwise “the evidence of the dog tracking may be strongly challenged by the Defence.” (Chief Inspector to Superintendent, August 15, 1966).

266. Hudson, A.H., “Bloodhound Testimony,” Criminal Law Review 10 (1963): 555–59Google Scholar; Hudson, A.H., “Bloodhound Testimony Again,” Criminal Law Review 14 (1967): 110Google Scholar. “Evidence of Police Dogs: Ground of Admissibility,” New Law Journal, July 26, 1966 (Citing the following cases: R. v. Montgomery [1966] N.I. 120 [Northern Ireland]; Patterson v. Nixon [1960], S.L.T. 220 [High Court of Judiciary, Scotland]; and R. v. Hass [1962] 35 D.L.R. 2^nd 172 [British Columbia Court of Appeal]).

267. R. v. Pieterson and Holloway [1995] 2 Cr. App. Rep. 11. The decision addressed the admissibility of an Oxford Police dog handler's testimony concerning the actions of her dog Ben in an armed robbery investigation. The Lords observed that there was “no authority hitherto in English law as to the admissibility of evidence concerning a tracker dog.” Drawing on precedents from across Britain's former empire—South Africa, Canada, New Zealand, and Ireland—Lord Taylor ultimately decided to admit such evidence, but it would be subject to two safeguards: first, a “Proper foundation must be laid by detailed evidence establishing the reliability of the dog in question.” Ibid, 15. In addition to proof of the dog's training, the dog must be shown to be “a reliable pointer to the existence of a scent from a particular individual.” Second, the jury would have to be instructed to “look with circumspection at the evidence of tracker dogs, having regard to the fact that the dog may not always be reliable and cannot be cross-examined.”

268. Compare Cole, Suspect Identities, 93–96; Sengoopta, Imprint of the Raj, 190–193 (experimentation with fingerprinting in the colonies and on recidivists).