


































AQUINO VOLUME3 ISSUE 2 DECEMBER 2023


Abstract

 Humans have coexisted with animals for thousands of years, but the seventeenth and 
nineteenth centuries are when the word "pet" was first coined to mean domesticated 
animal. Pet ownership is for companionship or pleasure, comfort, amusement, and 
security. It is good for a child's sense of value, social skills, and cognitive development. 
There are ethical issues with keeping animals as pets. These problems mean that 
neglecting animals poses a threat to humans and animals. Pets keeping may be 
unpleasant but not a sufficient reason to enslave them. This essay contends that having 
pets is beneficial, but there is an urgent need to investigate moral issues that violate the 
rights of animals. The moral discussions of petting sparked assessments of the nature of 
"beingness" and the treatment of confined animals. This study makes the utilitarian case 
that, if pet ownership serves the interests of the greatest number of animals and their 
keeper, it should be permitted for the mutual worthy of humanity.

Keywords: Pet-keeping, morality, relationship, companionship, animal slavery.

Introduction 

Animal slavery is the human 'invention' of domesticating animals, which predates their 
adoption for agriculture and experimental purpose. There may be strong evidence to 
argue that animal slavery is connected with pet ownership. Slavery is an institution that 
treated humans as a means to an end (Hauskeller, 2005). Aristotle's explanation of the 
'natural law' underlying slavery proved most enduring, lasting in various guises up until 
the very end of slavery in the United States. The human domination over animals proved a 
compelling example for many of those who sought to understand slavery (Jacoby, 2022).

The name "teleology" comes from the ancient Greek word "telelos, (rights)" which means 
"an end, fulfillment and completion are intrinsically inherent of all beings. A right is the 
reason to checkmate an action or something happens or is done (Brennan, 2002).  Animal 
right is privilege intended to achieve beingess (i.e., end), and practical deliberation entails 
outlining the specific procedures required to do so (Brennan, 2002). An agent's total telos, 
here interpreted as their ultimate goal and fundamental rights summum bonum (the 
"highest good"), can also be seen as the goal of their entire life, generally identified in 
antiquity as the imonia (happiness) (happiness). Violating the rights of animal has led to 
pain and avoiding the satisfaction of beingness (Rollin, 2012).  

 The word pet is a relatively recent invention dating back to the eighteenth and nineteenth 
centuries. Humans have lived with animals for much longer—dogs have been 
domesticated for at least 30,000 years (Matthew, 2017). Pet ownership is a prevalent 

IS PET-KEEPING A VIOLATION OF ANIMAL RIGHTS? 
A CONSEQUENTIALIST STANDPOINT

Ikechukwu Monday Osebor, PhD
Department of Philosophy, University of Delta, Agbor

  ikechukwu.osebor@unidel.edu.ng

129



custom with a long tradition. More than half of the world's population is thought to live 
with one or more pets in their homes and lives. For instance, it has been known to keep 
dogs as pets for at least 15,000 years. However, historical pet-keeping customs frequently 
diverge from popular modern beliefs. The term "pet" originally meant "favorite," and it 
was frequently used to describe either a person (such as a teacher's pet) or an object of love 
(such as a pet project) (Jalongo, 2023). Emmaline maintains that dogs were the first 
animals domesticated, although the history of animal domestication is complex and has 
different narratives. 'Pet keeping has transformed animal and human lives in many parts 
of the world. This revolution has transformed many family homes, and it has played 
important roles in family life: befriending the lonely, chumming with children, and even 
intervening between husband and wife (Jane and Julie-Marie, 2023). Pet keeping could 
be peaceful or chaotic; the cohabitation of domestic space between humans and animals 
has led to ethical issues. However, it is obvious that much damage has been done to the 
captured wild pets, such as changes in habitat, cognitive enhancement, widespread 
plucking of birds, and many others (Jane and Julie-Marie, 2023). Animal cruelty evokes 
moral feelings that will be argued from a consequentialist standpoint (Emmaline, n.d.; 
Leslie, 2004).

In Africa, pet keeping has resulted in animal cruelty since prehistoric times. Hunter-
gatherers have numerous pets, such as dogs, and they often take them to the forest or 
wilderness, where they teach them the act of hunting. Dogs were thought to understand 
human and animal movements and were typically kept for the joy they could bring to their 
owners or children (Jennifer et al., 2022). While hunting, dogs suffered and died in the 
wilderness; they were often traded as pets and flog to urbanites who wanted a vain 
companionship (Jane and Julie-Marie, 2023).

The domestication of animals such as horses, dogs, and cats could help establish a 
symbiotic relationship between their owners and the animals, but they took up space in 
homes and represented a potential source of disorder: noise, smells, and so on (Britannica, 
2023). Many dogs, whether those of the working classes or the middle classes, therefore 
slept outside in kennels, but new suburban homes had more space for pets (although dogs 
were often chained up in gardens) (Jennifer et al., 2022). Pet-keeping shows that the 
symbiotic relationship between a pet and its owner may not be the case. Instead, the 
doctrine of human supremacy over animals shows that human relationships with animals 
have often been ideologically impossible (Leslie, 2004). The argument that humans are 
fundamentally superior to animals is that dominance amounts to slavery. Aristotle's 
“explanation of the 'natural law' underlying slavery proved most enduring, lasting in 
various guises up until the very end of slavery in the United States. The human 
domination over domestic animals proved a compelling example for many of those who 
sought to understand slavery."(Jacoby, K. (2022)) The treatment of animals as lesser 
beings is unethical (Darya, 2021). 

Inter-species attachments have occurred involving human intervention, such as in 
households, zoos, and wildlife parks in which the animals were provisioned (Herzog, 
2014). In settings with human agency (such as houses, zoos, and wildlife parks), 
attachments between non-human animals of various species are surprisingly frequent. 
But in nature, interspecies animal friendships that are comparable to human pet 

130

                                            Aquino Journal of Philosophy, Vol 3 Issue 2, 2023
ISSN: 2786-9792

December 



ownership are either extremely uncommon or nonexistent (Herzog, 2014). Why did pet 
ownership only develop in Homo sapiens? Countries may have changed their legal status 
concerning animals. For instance, in "2015, the government of New Zealand recognized 
animals as sentient beings, in effect declaring them no longer property" (Linda, 2017). We 
experience "moral schizophrenia" when it comes to our ethical and legal responsibilities 
to nonhuman animals. We contend that it is morally wrong to subject animals to 
"unnecessary" suffering and that animals have morally important interests in avoiding 
suffering. The vast majority of the pain, suffering, and death that we inflict on animals 
cannot be seen as necessary in any sense, despite the fact that we have laws that ostensibly 
reflect these moral views. Because of our morally schizophrenic relationship to the 
position of animals as property, animal suffering will, in practice, be justified anytime it 
serves the interests of human property owners (Francione, 2004). This could be morally 
problematic for animals as well as people. Animals may be considered a part of a family or 
a best friend that wouldn't be sold for a million dollars (Linda, 2017; Foley, 1999).  In 
some cases, cross-species interactions or relationships could be best facilitated by 
professional animal trainers, but there may be no convincing evidence that non-human 
animals are capable of becoming attached to members of other species. This study is 
concerned with the question, "Is pet-keeping a violation of animals' telos?" 

The Ethical Issue of Taming Animals

Pet Keepping is one of the contemporary discussions in moral philosophy, bioethics, and 
legal philosophy. Philosophers are developing philosophical literature on animal ethics, 
the use of animals, and the ethical dilemma of confined animals by proposing acceptable 
ethical theories that would enhance the relationship between animals and their owners. 
Ethics is the study of moral values. Ethics deals with standards or principles for the 
evaluation of human actions as right or wrong (Mark, 2023). Conduct means "those 
actions that are freely taken or that are seen to spring from deliberate choices made by free 
moral agents." It justifies how people ought to make moral and immoral decisions 
(Beaney 2003). It focuses on behaviors based on a moral compass or values and society's 
shared values, laws, or traditions (Monday, 2020). Ethics is the study of morality. It 
studies moral principles that should guide human conduct. Ethics deals with what ought 
to be done or not done and the right actions that humans should follow (Mark, 2023). The 
question is: does pet keeping amount to a violation of animal rights? Pets are members of 
the family where they are kept. Humans must treat them with care, love, and respect. 
Modern pet keeping can be characterized by the custody of animals for no other reason 
than to be companions (Jennifer et al., 2022). But is the act of petting in the best interest of 
the animal or its owner? This question has sparked discussion in recent times about the 
ownership law and how animals are seen as the owner's personal property, just like other 
tangible property like a car or furniture.

Animals should not be used for factory farming and testing labs; these are forms of animal 
abuse. Animal petting violated their telos. Animals for games, 'puppy farm, and the act of 
establishing new behavioral patterns for animals violates their telos (Bernard, 2019). In 
the worst-case scenario, animals are abused through hoarding, dog fighting, 
cockfighting, and rings (Ray, 2020). Jennifer et al. (2022) maintain that "humans have 

131

Is Pet-keeping A Violation Of Animal Rights? ...  -    Ikechukwu Monday Osebor



dominated the living environment and their pets, with approaches varying between 
extremes of dominance and affection, love and abuse, cruelty and kindness." In some 
cases, keeping animals may be difficult because caring for their physical and 
psychological needs may violate their telos (Ray, n.d.). Also, the culture of sentiment is 
characterized by animal cruelty and dominance (Jennifer et al., 2022). Cruelty toward 
animals is ethically wrong. There may be fewer extreme cases of animal cruelty in 
keeping pets, but we must consider the fact that "pets are creatures with whom we share a 
world, and we rejoice in their companionship; you don't have to anthropomorphize to 
recognize that the feelings are returned. Let us be close and cherish each other always" 
(Doris, 2018). Keeping pets for companionship is a conduit of affection, which 
transforms human ends but not in the way that laboratory animals or farm animals do 
(Spencer et al., 2006). One could argue that millions of cats and dogs are killed in shelters 
every year. Bernard (2019) argues that, as St. "Thomas Aquinas teaches, animals were not 
perceived as enjoying genuine moral status. At best, it was obligatory not to treat them 
cruelly, as they sufficiently resembled humans so that gratuitous abusive treatment of 
them was likely to cause harm.

Some animals have been bred to the pleasure of their owners; sometimes they are given 
tasks to the extent they suffer pain and discomfort. Animal tasking and over-breeding 
would expose them to a greater risk of genetic defects or disease, leading to an increase in 
"zoonotic diseases" and the spread of zoonotic diseases such as the coronavirus (COVID-
19)". (Monday, 2020) Although improvements in medical and veterinary sciences have 
lowered the risk of zoonoses, or diseases transmitted between animals and humans, 
zoonotic infections continue to threaten human populations. Jennifer et al. (2022) 
maintain that the excruciating ordeal of pet keeping involves the manipulation of animals' 
bodies, behaviors, and emotional lives. For centuries, the confinement of animal bodies 
such as dogs, horses, and rabbits has been shaped to suit human fashions, conditions, and 
fancies. This, of course, has led to the violation of animals' telos and physical harm 
(Shutter, 2019).

 Moral Arguments on Animal Rights

 "Rights" is to fully express natural behavior, to be free without conferment, to live lives to 
the fullest, to enjoy their native environment, and to follow natural instincts (Regan, 
2013). These instincts are the best possible world for animals. Animal rights are moral 
principles grounded in the belief that non-human animals deserve the ability to wish as 
they wish without being subjected to the desires of human beings. At the core of animal 
rights is respect for animals, which means the total abolition of the use of animals in 
science, the total dissolution of commercial agriculture and culture, and the total 
elimination of commercial and sport hunting. (Regan, 2013) There may be many worlds, 
but respect for animals does not mean keeping them in private homes where their owners 
can rarely provide the proper conditions for keeping animals. Exotic pet keeping should 
be avoided, such as work experimentation; it leads to animal cruelty (Animals, n-d). 
Domesticated dogs and cats must be given the best care possible because they cannot 
survive "freely" in our concrete jungles. Adopting animals from shelters or saving them 
from a dangerous existence on the streets means dedicating time, money, and love to their 

132

                                            Aquino Journal of Philosophy, Vol 3 Issue 2, 2023
ISSN: 2786-9792

December 



patience to make them significant because they are dependent on their keeper for survival 
(Quotes, 2012). The belief in the practice of pet keeping is to engage in animal welfare 
and “protection against suffering.” Any efforts to prevent suffering must also accept the 
"right" of pets to express their intrinsic natural behavior. Dogs kept in houses for most of 
the day are being kept in an unnatural environment. So are rabbits kept in hutches and 
guinea pigs or birds kept in cages? These conditions infringe on the animals' telos 
(Sunstein & Nussbaum, 2004). Animal experimentation infringes on it telos, autonomy 
and it should be drastically reduced although animal experimentation is for clinical study 
is necessary but not for anthropocentrism (Benjamin, 2020).

Utilitarianism 

Utilitarianism is a moral theory that is associated with Jeremy Bentham (1747–1832) and 
John Stuart Mill (1806–1873). Utilitarianism holds that morality promotes actions that 
advance the happiness or pleasure of the greatest number of people (Carla, 2022). The 
morally best action will bring about the greatest amount of pleasure and avoid the pain of 
the greatest number of people (Monday, 2018). Utilitarianism determines the right from 
wrong of pet keeping by focusing on outcomes, or consequentialism. The study endorses 
utilitarianism as the rationale for pet keeping. Arguments in support of utilitarianism for 
pet keeping have received relatively little sustained attention in the philosophical 
literature. Pet keeping underlies many widely held beliefs about zoos, pet ownership, 
scientific research on animal and human subjects, and agriculture, although the idea of pet 
keeping is rigorous with several commitments. In relation to the view that humans 
keeping animals constitutes an ethical dilemma, utilitarianism is intuitively plausible for 
animal petting, but it may alter animals' rights (Killoren & Streiffer, 2020), This idea 
could be widely believed to be incompatible with the utilitarian approach. The best ethical 
theory for keeping animals is to overturn the conventional wisdom and maintain that 
utilitarianism has moral significance for petting animals (Monday, 2020). To strengthen 
utilitarian principles, we establish a coherent, robust, and intuitively appealing account of 
the moral significance of ethical theory (Killoren & Streiffer, 2020). The core of this 
theory is that whether pet ownership is morally right or wrong depends on the effects it 
produces. More specifically, the only effects of pet ownership that are relevant are the 
good and bad results that they produce (Encyclopedia, n.d.). Morally, pet keeping is best 
if it brings about the greatest amount of pleasure or happiness to the greatest number of 
pets and their keepers, but sentient animals should count for something in our ethical 
decision. Although petting animals could be equivalent to slavery because they are 
incarcerated in their telos. Monday, (2020), utilitarianism opposes unhappiness or harm. 
We maintain that animal cruelty is a violation of animal telos when applied, and 
utilitarianism would aim for the betterment or welfare of animals and their keepers 
without violating their telos. The knowledge of animals in housing must be reassessed 
because they have rights and should not be treated as the property of individuals (Leslie, 
2004). Rollin (2016) argues that animals have rights that are inherent in their nature 
"unique set of traits and powers that make the animal what it is—the 'bigness' of the pig, 
the 'dogness' of the dog—make the animal what it is. The telos of animals must be 
understood in terms being or nature. Utilitarianism is important in pet ownership because 

133

Is Pet-keeping A Violation Of Animal Rights? ...  -    Ikechukwu Monday Osebor



it evaluates actions based on consequences, not motivation. Although this philosophy has 
a problem with accounting values, which justify rights or wrongs, if utilitarianism is a true 
philosophy, then the unethical execution of animals is morally right (Monday, 2020). 
When it is advantageous to human property owners, animal suffering will be considered a 
practical matter and required. Animals can no longer be used as resources for humans if 
we take animal interests seriously. This does not imply that we must provide animals with 
the same rights as people or that, in cases of actual conflict, we cannot put human interests 
ahead of animal interests. Instead, we must acknowledge that animals only have one 
right—the right to not be treated like property—and that utilizing animals in ways that we 
never use humans does not give rise to human-animal conflicts (Francione, 2004). 
Animals will always remain nothing more than things that lack any morally relevant 
interests as long as they are considered to be human property, making it impossible for the 
concept of equal regard to apply to them (just as it could not apply to slaves). The 
hypothesis put forth is applicable to any sentient animal and does not call for any new 
cognitive traits in animals. (Francione, 2004). We argue that for utilitarianism to hold, 
other possible consequences must be considered in the context of animals. For instance, 
animal welfare must be considered otherwise. It sets a bad precedent that weakens the 
legal and ethical systems.

Conclusion

Pet keeping is good if the well-being of pets and their keepers is justified from a utility or 
consequential standpoint. The paper argues that pet keeping would be beneficial rather 
than worsening the telos of animals in confinement. Furthermore, the ability to feel pain 
may not be sufficient ground for a non-sentient being to obtain moral status. What is 
necessary for moral status is what happens as the consequence of an action, whether 
negative or positive. Our study maintains that moral agency must be taken into account in 
pet keeping to avoid repudiation of human-animal dignity. The paper concludes that 
utilitarianism cannot be overruled in debates on pet keeping because the theory is geared 
towards the common good of the greatest number of pets and their keepers.

References

Animals, (n-d) Animals as Pets https://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/animals/using/pets.shtml

Beaney, M. (2003). "Analysis," The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

Benjamin, R. (2020), Pet Ownership and the Ethical Perils of Domination. 
https://www.prindleinstitute.org/2020/11/pet-ownership-and-the-ethical-perils-
of-domination/

Benson, K. (2022). The Anthropocentric Truth of Soren Kierkegaard: A Critique, KKU 
International Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 12(2), 84–96.

Bernard, E. (2019). Telos and Farm Animal, Welfare Encyclopedia of Food and 
Agricultural Ethics: https://link.springer.com/referencework/10.1007/978-94-
024-1179-9

134

                                            Aquino Journal of Philosophy, Vol 3 Issue 2, 2023
ISSN: 2786-9792

December 



Brennan, T. (2002). Telos, Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Taylor and Francis, 
doi: 10.4324/9780415249126-A134-1 
https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/thematic/telos/v-1

Britannica, (2023), "pet, Encyclopedia Britannica, 
https://www.britannica.com/animal/pet. Accessed May 10, 2023.

Carla, T. (2022). Utilitarianism: What It Is, Founders, and Main Principles, 
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/u/utilitarianism.asp #:~:text=Investopedia 
%20%2F%20Jessica%20Olah,What%20Is%20Utilitarianism%3F,that%20caus
e%20unhappiness%20or%20harm.

Darya, S. (2021): The Question of Human Superiority Over Animals, 
https://www.shortform.com/blog/human-superiority-over-animals/

Doris, L. (2018). Is pet ownership ethical? Animal Rights and Welfare Activists on 
Animal Domestication, https://www.treehugger.com/arguments-for-and-
against-keeping-pets-127752

Emmaline, S. (n-d), 10 Reasons Why Pets Are Important to Humans. 
https://theimportantsite.com/10-reasons-why-pets-are-important-to-humans/
Encyclopedia (n-d) Act and Rule Utilitarianism, Internet Encyclopedia of 
Philosophy, https://iep.utm.edu/util-a r/#:~: 
text=Utilitarianism%20is%20one%20of%20 the, bad%2

Foley, R. (1999). "Analysis". Entry in The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, 
second edition, New York: Cambridge University Press.

Francione, G. L. (2004). Animals—Property or Persons? Rutgers Law School 
(Newark) Faculty Papers, http://law.bepress.com/rutgersnewarklwps/art21

Hauskeller, M. (2005). Telos: The Revival of an Aristotelian Concept in Present Day 
Ethics. Inquiry, 48(1), 62-75.

Herzog, H. (2014). Biology, Culture, and The Origins of Pet-keeping, Animal 
Behavior and Cognition, 1(3), 296-308. doi: 10.12966/abc.08.06.2014

Jacoby, K. (2022). Slaves by Nature? Domestic Animals and Human Slaves, In The 
Atlantic Slave Trade (pp. 59–70), Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy

Jalongo, M. R. (2023) Pet keeping in the Time of Covid-19: The Canine and Feline 
Companions of Young Children Early Childhood Education Journal, 51(6), 
1067–1077.

Jane, H., and Julie-Marie, S. (2023), Pet Revolution: Animals and the Making of 
Modern British Life, London: Reaktion, ISBN 978-1-78914-686-8 (HB).

Jennifer, H. David G. Lewis, and Marjorie M. Snipes (2022): Pet-Keeping. 
https://socialsci.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Anthropology/Introductory_Anthro
pology/Introduction_to_Anthropology_ (OpenStax)/18%3A_Human 
Animal_Relationship/18.05%3A_Pet-Keeping

Killoren, D., & Streiffer, R. (2020). Utilitarianism about Animals and the Moral 
Significance of their Use, Philosophical Studies, 177(4), 1043–1063.

135

Is Pet-keeping A Violation Of Animal Rights? ...  -    Ikechukwu Monday Osebor



Leslie, I. (2004). Pampered or Enslaved? The Moral Dilemmas of Pets, International 
Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 24(9):5–17. DOI: 
10.1108/01443330410790740

Linda, R. (2017) Should we Stop keeping Pets? Why do More and More Ethicists say 
Yes? https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/aug/01/should-we-stop-
keeping-pets-why-more-and-more-ethicists-say-yes

Mark, O. (2023), The Role of Ethics in Curbing Police Abuses, Bangladesh Journal of 
Bioethics DOI: http://doi.org/10.3329/bjbio.v14i1.54 

Matthew, W. (2017), The Invention of Pets, https://daily.jstor.org/the-invention-of-
pets/

Monday, O. (2020). Hiromitsu Nakauchi's Organ Farming is Playing God. Global 
Bioethics Enquiry; 8(2) https://globalbioethicsenquiry.com/wp-
content/uploads/2021/02/VP2OSEBOR.pdf

Monday, O. (2020). Is Altruism Always Sufficient for Organ Donation? Vroom's 
Expectancy theory, for expanding the organ donor pool, Saudi J Kidney Dis 
Transpl. 31(2):503-507. doi: 10.4103/1319-2442.284026. PMID: 32394924.

Monday, O. I. (2018) Is organ farming a panacea for organ crises? Ethical 
Implications, Eubios Journal of Asian and International Bioethics 28 (3):103-
108 (2018).

Monday, O. I. (2020). Ethics of Cognitive Restructuring: A Rehabilitation of Rape 
Victims and Offenders, Voices in Bioethics, 6. 
https://doi.org/10.7916/vib.v6i.7223

Quotes, (2012) Quotes from the Leaders of the Animal Rights Movement 
https://www.naiaonline.org/articles/article/quotes-from-the-leaders-of-the-
animal-rights-movement#sthash.WphSRoCg.dpbs

Ray, B. (2020): The Ethics of Pet Keeping 
Https://www.Philosophytalk.Org/Blog/Ethics-Pet-Keeping

Ray, B. (N-D), The Ethics of Pet Keeping. 
https://www.Philosophytalk.Org/Blog/Ethics-Pet-Keeping

Baldwin, T. (1998), Analytical philosophy, Routledge, Taylor and Francis, 
.doi:10.4324/9780415249126DD091https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/th
ematic/analytical-philosophy/v-1.

Regan, T. (2013), 'The Case for Animal Rights' In Ethics: Humans and Other Animals, 
Routledge (pp. 179–188), 

Rollin, B. (2016) Death, Telos, and Euthanasia, Ed. Franck L.B. Meijboom and 
Elsbeth N. Stassen https://doi.org/10.3920/978-90-8686-808-7

Rollin, B. E. (2012,). Telos. In Veterinary & Animal Ethics: Proceedings of the First 
International Conference on Veterinary and Animal Ethics,  Oxford,   
Blackwell; (pp. 75-83).

Shutterstock, (2019) Pets: Is it Ethical to keep Them? 

136

                                            Aquino Journal of Philosophy, Vol 3 Issue 2, 2023
ISSN: 2786-9792

December 



https://theconversation.com/pets-is-it-ethical-to-keep

Spencer, S., Decuypere, E., Aerts, S., and Johan, D. History and Ethics of Keeping 
Pets: Comparison with Farm Animals, J Agric Environ Ethics 19, 17–25 (2006) 
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-005-4379-8

Sunstein, C.  & Nussbaum, M. (2004). Animal Rights: Current Debates and New 
Directions, Oxford University Press.

137

Is Pet-keeping A Violation Of Animal Rights? ...  -    Ikechukwu Monday Osebor


	Page 137
	Page 138
	Page 139
	Page 140
	Page 141
	Page 142
	Page 143
	Page 144
	Page 145

