■V, 
 
 'S 
 
 THE 
 
 ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 ON 
 
 VIVISECTION. 
 
 SELECTIONS FROM THE 
 
 ADMISSIONS, ASSERTIONS & EVASIONS 
 
 OF THE WITNESSES. 
 
 OFFICE OF THE SOCIETY FOR PROTECTION OF ANIMALS FROM 
 VIVISECTION, i, VICTORIA STREET. LONDON. S.W 
 
 ON THE VIVISECTORS. 
 
 In that day of awful wailing 
 
 Human destinies unvailing, 
 When man rising, stands before Thee, 
 
 Spare not these culprits, God of glory. 
 
THE GENIUS OF PITY STAYING THE 
 VIVISECTOR'S HAND. 
 
 (After the recent symbolic painting, by Gabriel Max, Germany.) 
 ' ' The Genius of Pity stands besides a Physiologist, holding 
 in her hand a pair of scales. In one scale is a human brain, 
 surrounded with laurels; in another, a gloioing heart. The 
 scale containing the heart, far outweighs the scale containing 
 the brain. The right arm of the Genius is thrown round a 
 bound and bleeding dog." 
 
 Behold the heavier scale, wherein Man's heart 
 
 Doth far out-weigh his blood-enlaurelled brain, 
 Whilst, close beside, yon pitying Genius stands, 
 
 To stay the hand deep-skilled in craft of Pain ! 
 E'en could ye point — men of remorseless soul, 
 To lessened pangs among the human kind, 
 Still might we question of the final gain 
 
 From hearts grown ruthless as the wintry wind ! 
 But when, from all your myriad victims slain, 
 By torments direr than the mind may know, 
 Ye cannot point to one exalted truth, 
 
 To set against whole hecatombs of woe, 
 Men in whose breast one spark of pity glows, 
 
 Should wrest the scalpel from your tyrant hand, 
 To shield Man's faithful, but defenceless friends, 
 From miscalled Science, and her wolfish band ! 
 
 — Elliott Preston. 
 
 The great and good Dr. Johnson of Eng- 
 land rightly characterized vivisectors as "a 
 race of wretches who, with knives, poisons 
 other devilish contrivances of torture, pre- 
 tended to buy knowledge at the expense of 
 their own humanity." 
 
 "We plead the cause of those dumb 
 mouths that have no speech. " 
 
 Lord Shaftsbury said concerning vivisec- 
 tion: " The thought of this diabolical crime 
 disturbs me night and, day." 
 
THE 
 
 ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 ON 
 
 VIVISECTION. 
 
 SELECTIONS FROM THE 
 
 ADMISSIONS, ASSERTIONS & EVASIONS 
 
 OF THE WITNESSES. 
 
 OFFICE OF THE SOCIETY FOR PROTECTION OF ANIMALS FROM 
 VIVISECTION, i. VICTORIA STREET, LONDON, S.W. 
 
 Price Threepence. 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Preliminary Note . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 
 
 Chapter I. Extracts from Report of Royal Commission 7 
 
 Chapter II. Extracts from Minutes Illustrating the 
 Difficulty of Obtaining Evidence on 
 Viuisection . . . . . . . . 10 
 
 Chapter III. Extracts Exhibiting the Extent and 
 
 Cruelty of the Practice of Vivisection 16 
 
 Chapter IV. Extracts Referring to the Demoralizing 
 
 Effects of Vivisection on Students . . 32 
 
 Chapter V. Extracts Illustrating the Confusion and 
 Contradiction prevailing concerning 
 Anaesthetics .. .. .. .. • • 39 
 
 Chapter VI. Extracts exhibiting the views of Vivi- 
 
 SECTORS ON THE PAINLESSNESS OF STARVA- 
 TION, BAKING ALIVE, &C, AND OTHER 
 NOTEWORTHY OPINIONS . . . . . . 42 
 
 Chapter VII. Extracts admitting the failures and use- 
 
 lessness of vivisection . . . . .'.46 
 
 Index .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. • • 49 
 
"The grand name of Science is now pros- 
 tituted to the (uses?) of these hellish crimes 
 and vile monstrous cruelties too loathsome 
 to be even written about by the fiendish 
 tormentors themselves. "-London Paper 
 
 PRELIMINARY NOTE. 
 
 In the latter part of the year 1874 an d the begin- 
 ning of 1875, public interest was directed to the 
 subject of Vivisection, first by the presentation of 
 an influentially signed Memorial to the Royal 
 Society for Prevention of Cruelty, and secondly by 
 the introduction into Parliament of two Bills for 
 the restriction of the practice, one by Lord Henni- 
 ker in the House of Lords, the other by Dr. Lyon 
 Playfair in the House of Commons. These Bills 
 were presented respectively on the 4th and 12th of 
 May, but it was recognized that Parliament was 
 not then in possession of sufficient information to 
 deal justly with the subject, and on the 22nd of 
 June a Royal Commission was issued " To inquire 
 into the practice of subjecting live animals to ex- 
 periments for scientific purposes." The Commis- 
 sion consisted of Viscount Cardwell (Chairman) ; 
 Lord Winmarleigh, Right. Hon. W. E. Forster, 
 Sir John Burgess Karslake, Prof. Thomas Henry 
 Huxley, John Eric Erichsen, Esq., and Richard Holt 
 Hutton, Esq. Of these seven, the first four were 
 politicians, the fifth an eminent London surgeon, 
 the sixth a still more eminent physiologist, and the 
 seventh the editor of the Spectator newspaper. A 
 careful examination of the Minutes shows that the 
 
four politicians conducted the inquiry impartially ; 
 that Mr. Erichsen acted as Counsel for the Medical 
 Profession ; Mr. Huxley as Counsel for the Physiolo- 
 gists ; and Mr. Hutton as Counsel for the Animals. 
 The Commission commenced its sittings on the 
 5th July, 1875, and signed its Report on the 8th 
 January, 1876 ; having in the interval examined 53 
 witnesses and obtained from them replies to 6,551 
 Questions — all recorded in their Minutes of Evidence. 
 
 As the Parliamentary Blue-Book containing this 
 Report and these extensive Minutes, together with 
 several valuable Appendices, constitutes a large 
 folio volume, it has been found convenient to print 
 Extracts therefrom for the use of persons desirous 
 of acquainting themselves with the most important 
 admissions made by the leading vivisectors of 
 England and their advocates.* The first collection 
 of such Extracts was made by the Hon. Sec. of the 
 Victoria Street Society and published as an Appen- 
 dix to the Statement of the Society on the 1st of 
 March, 1876. The large edition of this Statement 
 having been long exhausted, the Society has 
 for some time thankfully availed itself of an 
 excellent short collection published by the Tun- 
 bridge Wells Society and prepared by its late Hon. 
 Sec, Miss Monro. A larger and more complete 
 
 * Copies of the Blue-Book itself, price 4s. 4c!., may be obtained by 
 written order to Mr. Philip Stephen King, Parliamentary Publisher, 
 King Street, Westminster. 
 
series of extracts appearing now to be needed, the 
 first collection has been entirely revised and much 
 extended, till it is believed that it contains all the 
 more important passages in the Minutes of Evidence 
 illustrating the evils of vivisection. 
 
 F. P. C. 
 
 i, Victoria Street, S.W., Nov., 1881. 
 
 It will be understood that these Extracts are not 
 intended to represent a Digest or Resume of the Report 
 or of the Minutes, but only a collection of the most im- 
 portant admissions concerning the evils of vivisection 
 made by the Commissioners and by the physiologists who 
 appeared before them as witnesses. 
 
THE ROYAL COMMISSION ON 
 VIVISECTION, &c. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 EXTRACTS FROM REPORT OF ROYAL 
 COMMISSION. 
 
 [It will be borne in mind that the REPORT from 
 which the following are verbatim extracts, was 
 signed by Mr. Erichsen and Professor Huxley as well 
 as by the other Commissioners. The admissions 
 in which these representatives of physiology were 
 driven to concur, may thus be held to be altogether 
 indisputable.] 
 
 (Page vii.) We find that until a compara- 
 tively recent period physiology . . . had been for 
 some time past but little cultivated in this country, but 
 that there has been of late years a great movement in 
 advance. . . . There is at the present time ... a 
 great scientific revival. . . . (Page iv.) We think it most 
 desirable that an effectual restraint should be placed 
 upon what Dr. Taylor has described to us as purpose- 
 less cruelty; on experiments made in excessive numbers; 
 on experiments made to establish what has been 
 already proved ; on experiments attended with great 
 pain, and defeating the very object in view ; on 
 experiments made where a man has been desirious of 
 bringing himself forward, or trying a new thing merely 
 for the sake of a little notoriety. . .. (Page xv.) Sir Thos. 
 Watson, Sir George Burrows, Sir James Paget, and 
 many others have suggested the analogy of the 
 Anatomy Act (for legislation) and some scientific 
 
witnesses have expressed their opinion that the inter- 
 ference of the legislature is called for in the interests, 
 not only of humanity, but also of science. Sir William 
 Fergusson thinks that if the public really knew what 
 was actually going on in this country at this time they 
 would expect an interference on the part of the Crown 
 and Parliament just as much as with reference to the dis- 
 interring of dead bodies years ago. . . . (Page xvii.) But 
 even if the weight of authority on the side of legisla- 
 tive interference had been less considerable, we should 
 have thought ourselves called upon to recommend it by 
 the reason of the thing. ... It is manifest that 
 the practice is from its very nature liable to great abuse. 
 ... It is not to be doubted that inhumanity may 
 be found in persons of very high positions as physiolo- 
 gists. . . . We have had some evidence that cases 
 have arisen in which the unpractised student has taken 
 upon himself without guidance in his private lodgings 
 to expose animals to torture without anaesthetics for 
 no purpose which could merit the name of legitimate 
 scientific research. Evidence of this nature is not 
 easily obtained. . . . Besides the cases in which 
 inhumanity exists, we are satisfied there are others in 
 which carelessness and indifference prevail to an extent 
 sufficient to form a ground for legislative interference. 
 . . . We have been much struck by the consideration 
 that severe experiments have been engaged in for 
 the purpose of establishing results, which have been 
 considered inadequate to justify that severity, by 
 persons of very competent authority. 
 
 (Page xx.) What we should humbly recommend to your 
 Majesty would be the enactment of a law by which ex- 
 periments upon living animals, whether for original re- 
 search or for demonstration, should be placed under 
 the control of the Secretary of State who should have 
 power to grant licences. . . . (Pagexxi.) The Secretary 
 of State must have the most complete powers of efficient 
 inspection. . . The Inspectors must be persons of such 
 character and position as to command the confidence 
 of the public, no less than that of men of science. . . . 
 We believe that by such a measure as we have now 
 
proposed the progress of medical knowledge may be 
 
 made conformable with the just requirements of 
 
 humanity. . . . We trust that Your Majesty's 
 
 Government and the Parliament of this kingdom will 
 
 recognise the claim of the lower animals to be treated 
 
 with humane consideration, and will establish the 
 
 right of the community to be assured that this claim 
 
 shall not be forgotten amid the triumphs of advancing 
 
 science /r~»" j\ /-> 
 
 (Signed) Cardwell. 
 
 WlNMARLEIGH. 
 W. E. FORSTER. 
 
 John B. Karslake. 
 
 j. H. Huxley. 
 
 John Eric Erichsen. 
 
 Richard Holt Hutton. 
 
 [To the above general Report signed by all the 
 Commissioners (including, as above remarked, 
 Messrs. Erichsen and Huxley), Mr. Hutton added a 
 special Report of his own, occupying a page and a 
 half. The following are extracts (pp. xxii. and 
 xxiii.) :— ] 
 
 " Should it please your Majesty and Parliament to 
 pass any such measure as w r e have recommended in 
 this Report, I desire to suggest one additional re- 
 striction. . . . That restriction is, that the house- 
 hold animals, dogs and cats, should be exempted 
 altogether from experiments. . . . The measure pro- 
 posed will not at all satisfy my own conception of 
 the needs of the case unless it results in putting an end 
 to all experiments involving not merely torture but 
 anything at all approaching it ; for, where the pursuits 
 of scientific truth and common compassion come into 
 •collision it seems to me that the ends of civilization no 
 less than that of morality require us to be guided by 
 .the latter and higher principle." . . . 
 
 Richard Holt Hutton. 
 
 8th January, 1876. 
 
10 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 EXTRACTS FROM MINUTES OF EVIDENCE 
 ILLUSTRATING THE DIFFICULTY OF 
 OBTAINING EVIDENCE ON VIVISECTION. 
 
 [To estimate justly the importance of such 
 admissions as have been obtained — in many cases 
 we might rather say, dragged — from the witnesses 
 before the Royal Commission, it is necessary that the 
 reader should have before him a few specimens of the 
 replies whereby the efforts of the Commission to 
 reach the truth were continually baffled. Answers 
 tending to the glorification of vivisection were 
 brought out with the utmost fluency by the aid of 
 the friendly examinations of Messrs. Erichsen and 
 Huxley ; but for the elucidation of the simplest fact 
 on the other side, the labours of the four statesmen 
 on the Commission, and of Mr. Hutton, were 
 almost infructuous. The following examples- 
 of their ineffectual efforts in this direction re- 
 call the replies of the witnesses at a once 
 famous Royal Trial, Non so ; non mi ricordo ; and 
 justify Dr. Hoggan's remark, that they "might 
 as well inquire into Freemasonry" (4288), and 
 Dr. Walker's observation, that " it is impossible to 
 argue the point of humanity with most professional 
 viVisectors. They appear to ignore everything : 
 they see no kind of abuse, and very often no pain- 
 This is the result of habit and esprit de corps '" 
 (4909).] 
 
II 
 
 Sir Thomas Watson examined (76) :* Are you 
 acquainted with this Handbook for the Physiological 
 Laboratory edited by Dr. Burdon-Sanderson ? — No ; I 
 have never seen it. 
 
 Sir George Burrows (205) : Knows of the existence 
 of the Handbook but cannot say that he has read it. 
 (227.) Asked was he aware of Dr. Legg's experiments ? 
 — I have been ten years away from Bartholomew's and 
 therefore I think you had better ascertain that from 
 some other source. (243.) Asked concerning curarized 
 frogs slit open, and a tissue dragged out for two hours 
 under a microscope, — would he justify such experi- 
 ments ? — I do not know. 
 
 Sir James Paget (349) : Would not like to mention 
 Majendie's name with entire reprobation. (352.) Does 
 not know whether Dr. Pye Smith uses demonstrations 
 at Guy's Hospital. (354.) Does not know the Hand- 
 book well. (379-) Knows nothing of the experiments 
 at Florence, Leipzig, Vienna, or Paris. (481.) It is 
 not that he avoids answering the question, but of late 
 years he has not been conversant with all that goes on 
 abroad. (A few questions later (517) asked): I know 
 you are well acquainted with foreign literature and in 
 comparing the accounts of experiments on animals as 
 published in Germany or France, do you not think 
 that vivisection is far more extensively practised in 
 the schools abroad than here ? — Far more extensively. 
 (543.) It is a fact, is it not, as Mr. Ray Lankester 
 asserted not long ago, that the number of experi- 
 ments which .... ought to be performed will in- 
 crease in almost geometrical proportion as the science 
 enlarges? — I cannot venture to predict how that 
 may be. 
 
 Dr. Acland (994) : (Asked) In a paper (by Brown 
 Sequard) which I have in my hand, he says : " My 
 watching over guinea pigs has been on such a scale (at 
 one time I had 584 in my laboratory), that I can say 
 I have had many and many thousands under observa- 
 
 * The figures attached to these extracts refer to the number of the 
 Minute of Evidence and may be verified instantly in the Blue-book. 
 
tion "... Would you not say that if experiments 
 are attaining to anything like these dimensions in 
 England they would require careful supervision? . . . 
 I should be loth to sanction anything which added to 
 the suffering in the world. . . I wish to say nothing 
 here on the subject of field sports, &c. 
 
 Mr. John Simon (1491) : Do not you admit that on 
 the Continent, certainly in Italy and probably else- 
 where, these experiments have been pursued in a very 
 reckless spirit ? — I do not know enough of what has 
 gone on in Italy to speak positively. . . . You are 
 proposing that physiologists shall be treated as a 
 dangerous class, that they shall be licensed and regu- 
 lated like publicans and prostitutes. 
 
 Dr. Pavy (2169) (Asked): I only want to get your re- 
 pudiation of them (the worst experiments in the Hand- 
 book) as experiments for the purposes of teaching? — I 
 should not consider myself bound to do anything 
 but what I considered conscientiously right. 
 
 Dr. Pye Smith (2171) : Do you think that for the 
 purposes of teaching these painful experiments are 
 desirable, even with a class of advanced physiologists ? — 
 I should sa3^ that is a question which must be left to the 
 judgment and conscience of the teacher. 
 
 Dr. Michael Foster (2408) : Do you suppose that 
 experiments in baking animals to death are of the kind 
 which would be conducted in English laboratories ? — I 
 should not like to say anything about it unless I knew 
 all the details of the experiment. But in that respect 
 I should say that baking an animal to death would not 
 be useful. (2409.) They were simply experiments to 
 ascertain at what temperature the animal would survive. 
 It must depend so much upon what investigation the 
 experiment was a part of, whether it were justifiable 
 or not. 
 
 Dr. Burdon Sanderson (2265) : Asked, It sa3^s here 
 (in the Handbook) " On a curarized rabbit." Do I 
 rightly understand that that ought to be " In an anaes- 
 theticized or narcotized rabbit ? " — Ma3^ I make a 
 general observation in reference to this book, namely, 
 that we had not in view the criticisms of people who 
 
13 
 
 did not belong to our craft in writing it ? (2744.) Does 
 not think he can give a guess at all at the number of 
 animals consumed in a year in Ludwig's or Claude 
 Bernard's laboratories. (2748.) Cannot give any idea 
 of the number of experiments in the Handbook which 
 were painful. (2753.) Would prefer not answering 
 (a question about Sir Robert Christison) with 
 reference to the particular case, because I do not 
 remember. (2778.) (Asked about baking animals to 
 death by MM. Delaroche and Berger, to see at what 
 temperature they would die) : Those experiments might, 
 if they were conducted with skill, be on one hand pro- 
 ductive of important results, and on the other not be 
 attended with much pain, because an animal, when 
 subjected to a high temperature, very soon comes to a point 
 at which pain ceases. I cannot comment upon the 
 particular experiment, because I do not know it. 
 (2792.) Asked about the choice of M. Dupuy for 
 teaching in the College for the Medical Education of 
 Women (a French vivisector, who could not express 
 himself in very good English, when two, an Englishman 
 and a Scotchman, offered themselves, who would not 
 have used vivisection) : I took no active part in the 
 affair at all. (2793.) All that I did was to express my 
 favourable opinion of Dr. Dupuy as a physiologist, but 
 I did not express any opinion of the others. (2794.) 
 (Asked) Did not Dr. Dupuy resign because the young 
 women would not attend vivisectional experiments ? 
 I am sorry to say I cannot tell you anything about that. 
 (2795.) I know nothing about the matter since that time. 
 (Asked) How he procures dogs for experiments at Uni- 
 versity College Hospital ? We depend very much upon 
 our servant, who is a very reliable and respectable man, 
 and who always acts in a straightforward way in the 
 purchase of animals. 
 
 Sir William Gull (5545) Asked : Are there many 
 remedial drugs which you could enumerate which have 
 been discovered by these processes (vivisections) ? — 
 I am sorry to say that I am not a great believer in 
 drugs. 
 
 Dr. Carpenter : Asked (5616): I see an experiment 
 
14 
 
 narrated in your own work on Physiology, as to which I 
 should like to know whether you think it was really a 
 desirable one to make. I find this stated : " The intro- 
 duction of a little boiling water threw the animal at once 
 into a kind of adynamic state, which was followed by 
 death in three or four hours ; the mucous membrane of the 
 stomach was found red and swollen, whilst an abundant 
 exudation of blackish fluid had taken place into the 
 cavity of the organ." It is not one of your own experi- 
 ments, but one of which you are there narrating the 
 results. Now do you not think that that might have been 
 argued as one of the most certain inferences from the 
 well known facts of human experience, and that it was 
 quite an unnecessary experiment to make ? — • That 
 which you have just read is probably taken from a late 
 edition of my book (5617). It is the seventh edition, by 
 Mr. Power, p. 129. — It is not an experiment that I am 
 acquainted with. I have so far given up the study of 
 human physiology, that I have really not kept pace 
 with the inquiries to which that experiment relates. 
 (5618) Then this experiment was not published by 
 you ? — No. I would not give an opinion upon it with- 
 out knowing the purpose of it. (5619) It is published 
 in your book, but not by you ? — Not by me.* 
 
 Dr. Sharpey (454) : Thinks that abuses might take 
 place, but he does not know it. (456.) There are 
 
 * On this statement of Dr. Carpenter's the following observations 
 were made in The Zoophilist, No. 4: — " Now this statement, be it 
 remembered, is no mere hasty error of the witness-box. It is one 
 which before publication in the Blue-book had been submitted in 
 proof to its author, deliberately read, deliberately corrected and 
 deliberately put forth by him as fact, not from the Commissioners' 
 Room, but from his own study, within arm's length — we can hardly 
 doubt — of at least one copy of each of the various editions of the 
 work to which it refers. Is it conceivable that under such circum- 
 stances it should prove on examination to be simply and abso- 
 lutely false ? Yet, so it is. The experiment of which Dr. Car- 
 penter declares that he has never heard, with the very line of 
 research connected with which he protests he is altogether un- 
 acquainted, and the account of which he assures the Commission 
 has been inserted in his work since he himself had ceased to have 
 any control over it, was, in plain truth recorded by himself in the 
 identical words in which the record was quoted to him; and that, 
 
i5 
 
 people in the country who are hunting a mere Will-o'- 
 the-wisp, and drawing sober people after them. 
 (577.) Had not read Legg's Report in detail. 
 
 Prof. Humphry (659) : Had " glanced " at the Hand- 
 book. (716.) (At Norwich) " I heard that something was 
 going on, and went into the room, but very soon had to 
 leave it. I merely saw an animal on the table, and 
 some one doing something to it. What they were doing 
 I did not know at all, and I was unable to remain and 
 ascertain." (777.) Cannot say positively that he has 
 seen experiments under curari. 
 
 Prof. Williams : Asked concerning the return of 
 animals used for experiment in his College made to the 
 Commission (had certified that " only frogs " were 
 used, and anaesthetics always used ; and on it being 
 proved that horses were experimented upon even by 
 himself without rendering them unconscious, he replied, 
 (6084.) " I never thought of the horse at the time: the 
 thing really escaped my memory." (6086.) The 
 Commission then asked, " And you I suppose, also 
 forgot what had happened when you sent the next 
 answer, in which it is said that the animals are always 
 rendered unconscious ? " — " Yes." 
 
 Mr. Schafer (3818) : " Never heard of such a thing" 
 as physiologists practising privately in their houses or 
 in private laboratories.* 
 
 not as a mere interpolation in a chapter already written, such as 
 might possibly have escaped a not very tenacious memory, but as an 
 important feature of an entirely rewritten section, recast expressly 
 with the object of fully developing in this, the latest edition issued 
 personally by Dr. Carpenter himself, the line of enquiry to which 
 it refers." 
 
 * This last observation is not a little surprising, considering the 
 notoriety of Dr. Richardson's experiments at his private residence in 
 London, and those of Mr. G. H. Lewes, who boasts that, " though not 
 a member of the profession, there are few members of the profession 
 who have done more physiological work than I have " (6334). 
 
i6 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 EXTRACTS FROM MINUTES ILLUSTRATING 
 THE EXTENT AND CRUELTY OF THE 
 PRACTICE OF VIVISECTION. 
 
 [The extracts in this chapter, read in the light of 
 the foregoing remarkable examples of disingenu- 
 ousness, will be found exceedingly important.] 
 
 Sir George Burrows (157): Thinks there have been 
 great abuses in the performance of operations on living 
 animals and (158) that they ought to be restrained. 
 
 Dr. Sharpey (420) : M. Chossat of Paris made a 
 number of experiments on all classes of animals in 
 which he starved them to death and in some cases it 
 took many days before the end came and during that 
 time of course they must have been subjected to great 
 suffering. (552.) Asked : I am told that Ludwig has an 
 engine at work to secure artificial respiration which is 
 at work night and day, or at least to a very great 
 extent, the scale of the operations is so large ? I have 
 seen the apparatus. There is a similar one at Uni- 
 versity College. 
 
 Professor Humphry (635) : Experiments have to be 
 repeated and confirmed many times before a fact is 
 really established. (740.) : Agrees with Ray Lankester 
 that the number of experiments must increase very 
 rapidly if the progress of science is to be kept up — the 
 pathological experiments especially. 
 
 Dr. Acland (944) : " The number of persons in this 
 and other countries who are becoming biologists with- 
 out being medical men is very much increasing. 
 Modern civilisation seems to be set upon acquiring 
 
i7 
 
 biological knowledge, and one of the consequences of 
 this is, that whereas medical men are constantly 
 engaged in the study of anatomy and physiology for a 
 humane purpose (that is, for the purpose of doing 
 immediate good to mankind), there are a number of 
 persons now who are engaged in the pursuit of these 
 subjects for the purpose of acquiring abstract know- 
 ledge. That is quite a different thing. I am not at all 
 sure that the mere acquisition of knowledge is not a 
 thing having some dangerous and mischievous tenden- 
 cies in it. Now it has become a profession to 
 discover ; and I have often met persons who think that 
 a man engaged in original research for the sake of 
 adding to knowledge is therefore a far superior being to 
 a practising physician, who is simply trying to do good 
 with his knowledge. ... So many persons have 
 got to deal with these wonderful and beautiful organisms 
 just "as they deal with physical bodies that have no 
 feeling and no consciousness." 
 
 Sir W. Fergusson, Bart. (1035) : " The impression 
 on my mind is, that these experiments are done 
 frequently in a most reckless manner (1036) and (if 
 known to the public) would bring the reputation of 
 certain scientific men far below what it should be. (1037) 
 I have reason to imagine that sufferings incidental to 
 such operations are protracted in a very shocking 
 manner. I will give you an illustration of an animal 
 being crucified for several days, perhaps introduced 
 several times in a lecture-room for the class to see how 
 the experiment was going on. (1028) I believe it (the 
 above) to be done in this country." " Mr. Syme lived 
 to express an abhorrence of such operations, at all 
 events if they were not useful. (1029) His ultimate 
 authority was strongly on the other side (against them), 
 as expressed in a special report of his own. (1030) No 
 man perhaps has ever had more experience of the 
 human subject than Mr. Syme, and I myself have a 
 strong opinion that such an expression, coming from 
 Mr. Syme, was a mature and valuable opinion." (1031) 
 (Asked whether his opinion in mature life was much 
 less favourable to these experiments than when he was 
 
young ?) " Yes, because I had not the same grasp of 
 the subject at that time. I was more, perhaps, influen- 
 ced by what other people had done, and by the wish to 
 come up to what they had done in such matters ; but 
 the more matured judgment of recent years has led me 
 to say to myself now, that I would not perform some of 
 the operations at this present time that I performed 
 myself in earlier days." 
 
 Prof. Rolleston (1287) asked : Is not this practice of 
 making experiments on living animals very liable to 
 abuse ? I think it is very liable to abuse. It is liable 
 to abuse in common with many other studies, and it 
 has also certain special liabilities. which are inherent in 
 its particular nature. First it is amenable to abuse 
 when employed for purposes of research, and I must 
 say that with regard to all absorbing studies that is the 
 besetting sin of them and of original research, that they 
 lift up man so entirely above the ordinary sphere of 
 daily duty that they betray him into selfishness and 
 unscrupulous neglect of duty. Vivisection is specially 
 likely to tempt a man into certain carelessnesses, the 
 passive impressions produced by the sight of suffering 
 growing as is the law of our nature, weaker, while the 
 habit of and the pleasure in experimenting grows 
 stronger by repetition. (As an illustration, Prof. Rolle- 
 ston cited the following.) Prof. Schiff says in a work of 
 his, Lecons suv la physiologic de la digestion, Tom. i., 
 p. 291, that when dogs come into his laboratory, he 
 finds it necessary to cut two of their nerves, the nerves 
 of vocalisation, the inferior recurrent laryngeal nerves 
 as they are called. " Je suis oblige de faire subir cette 
 derniere operation a beaucoup de nos chiens fraichement 
 arrives au laboratoire pour les empecher de se livrer a 
 des concerts nocturnes trop bruyants et de discrediter 
 ainsi les etudes physiologiques aupres des habitants du 
 quartier." It is true that it is only in young animals 
 that this operation entails great dyspnoea and distress ; 
 still it is a grave operation on any animal, and ought 
 not to be spoken of with such levity as in the terms 
 quoted. Further, in a letter of Prof. Schiff's in the 
 Times of January 7, 1874, ne distinctly says that the 
 
19 
 
 reason that the inhabitants of the district were not so 
 disturbed as that French quotation says they might 
 have been, was that there were no dogs in pain in his labora- 
 tory. Now, it is perfectly clear that the statement in 
 the book published in 1868 ought to be shown to be 
 reconcilable with the statement in the letter of January, 
 1874. The matter is of sufficient importance to justify 
 one in demanding this. I mean to say that vivisection 
 in its application to research may be sound, but more 
 demoralising than other kinds of devotion to research. 
 (1287.) Mr. Skey wrote in his work "A man who has 
 the reputation of a splendid operator is ever a just 
 object of suspicion." . . . Now, a person who is 
 operating on the lower animals, who have no friends 
 to remonstrate for them, is very much more likely 
 to give way to such a temptation than a person oper- 
 ating upon human beings who would have friends. 
 1 1290.) " Haller fell in his later age into a permanent 
 anguish of conscience, which is shown in his epistles, 
 reproaching himself most bitterly for his vivisections 
 (stated by Krug). I should wish to state that Haller 
 was by no means in his dotage at that time — quite the 
 reverse. He was not seventy when he died. That is 
 the striking point : and I think I may say this (but I 
 shall not give the name), that it is within my own 
 personal experience that a person who has a consider- 
 able name before the world, and has performed a large 
 number of vivisections in his time, has expressed him- 
 self to me as exceedingly sorry that he ever did them — 
 did them I should say, to the extent which he did." 
 (1340.) Dr. Child who has been a practising doctor 
 and is now an exceedingly useful inspector of health, 
 wrote a book about ten years ago in which he dealt 
 with this subject. He has said to me distinctly that if 
 he were to write that essay over again, he should 
 recommend legislative interference, which he then 
 thought was not necessary." (1346.) " Dr. Foster 
 told me he had never shown the experiment in the 
 Handbook on Recurrent Sensibility and never seen it 
 himself." (1347.) (Asked, "But surely it is put here 
 in a Handbook in a mode which would encourage the 
 
20 
 
 trying of that experiment ? ") — " Obviously. I am speak- 
 ing in vindication of the character of a friend of mine, but 
 not at all in vindication of the book." (1351) (Asked: 
 " Then I understand that your opinion about the Hand- 
 book is, that it is a dangerous book to society, and that 
 it has warranted to some extent the feeling of anxiety 
 in the public which its publication has created ? " — " I 
 am sorry to have to say that I do think that is so." 
 
 Dr. Walker (1727) : " Inflammation by chemical and 
 traumatic agents was set up in the joints and in the 
 transparent cornea of the eye by passing a thread 
 through it and establishing a seton. These experiments 
 caused great pain and the lambs and dogs on which 
 they were performed were unable to rest day or night ;. 
 and if some ease enabled them occasionally to rest, the 
 experimenter used to exasperate the wounds afresh, and 
 thus make rest impossible. (1729.) The sketch repre- 
 sents a frog prepared in this way. The two sciatic 
 nerves are laid bare for about half an inch. The 
 animal is then placed in a small trough containing 
 oil or glycerine, and kept in situ by nailing its feet. 
 In this state the animals live as long as nature can 
 endure such torture. (4888) One case of gastric fistula 
 having been established, the posterior half of a living 
 frog was inserted into the aperture leading to the 
 stomach of the dog, while the anterior half, head and 
 legs, protruded externally, and were fastened there 
 until half of the frog was nearly digested away. As the 
 gastric juice gradually ate away the skin, the nerves 
 and the muscles, the frog made desperate efforts to 
 escape by moving its anterior extremities very rapidly." 
 (See Claude Bernard, Physiologie, Vol. II., p. 409, 1856.) 
 He had done the experiment before, and was certain 
 of the results obtained ; the repetition before his class 
 was wanton and cruel. . . . The gullet of a dog is 
 exposed by an operator and a thread is passed round 
 it. A certain substance for example liver of sulphur 
 (this happens to come to my mind because I saw it) 
 is then forced into his stomach, immediately after 
 which, to prevent the animal vomiting, the aesophagus 
 is closed by the thread. Anaesthetics are of course 
 
21 
 
 not used on these occasions and the dog lives as long 
 as nature can endure the combined effects of the opera- 
 tion and the poison coupled with the want of food 
 and drink. . . . An experimenter, see Medical Times, 
 August 3, 1861, p. 104, was once lecturing on the 
 effects of poisons in the animal organism ; in order to 
 show us however, that innocuous matter has the power 
 of " disorganizing " animal tissue he forced half a pint 
 of boiling water into the stomach of a dog. The 
 animal gave evidence immediately of suffering great 
 pain and soon died. 
 
 Dr. Anthony (2448) : What I saw in Paris pointed to 
 this, that very frequently men who are in the habit of 
 making these experiments, at all events the French, 
 are very careless of what becomes of the animal when 
 it has served its purpose. The brain is exposed, 
 portions of it are cut, or pinched, or torn, and then the 
 animal having served its purpose is thrown on the floor 
 to creep into a corner and die. (2509.) Knows himself 
 of instances of young men from mere curiosity carrying 
 on these experiments. (2510.) Could mention them, 
 but would scarcely like to do so. 
 
 Dr. Burdon Sanderson (2607) : From these three 
 sources I am able to form a very correct opinion as to 
 the number of people who are actually engaged in this 
 country in physiological investigations. About the time 
 that Dr. Sharpey was giving evidence here we went 
 through the number together, and at that time we 
 calculated that in England and Scotland there were 
 about thirteen now engaged more or less in physiolo- 
 gical investigations in this country. I think I may 
 make it up, by taking a great deal of pains, to fifteen 
 or sixteen. I have got the names here: Dr. Yule, Dr. 
 McKendnck, Professor Dewar, Professor Rutherford, 
 Professor Gamgee, Dr. Caton, Dr. Michael Foster, Dr. 
 Pavy, Dr. Pye Smith, Dr. Brunton, Dr. Ferrier, Dr. 
 Fraser, Dr. Crichton Brown, Dr. Klein and Mr. Garrod. 
 I have put the names of four or five gentlemen who 
 really are not in any sense engaged systematically in 
 physiological investigation. (2608.) I ought to have 
 put him, Dr. Wickham Legg, in. (2610.) Asked : Are 
 
you giving the whole list, had we not better put your 
 own name too ? — Yes.* 
 
 Prof. Rutherford (2921 to 2932) ; The actual opera- 
 tion (on dogs) would last " about half-an-hour." At the 
 end of the half hour the dog would be " simply 
 paralyzed by curari having artificial respiration by 
 means of a pair of bellows kept up having a tube in 
 its common bile duct with the bile dropping from it 
 . . . the wound in the abdominal wall being once 
 or twice, or sometimes three or four times I dare say 
 opened and a substance injected into the bowels, the 
 wound was then closed again and the animal wrapped 
 up in cotton wadding." The animal was kept under 
 the influence of curari, " the whole time." (Asked, 
 2925.) Then supposing that curari does not deaden 
 pain would there not be very great pain during that 
 eight hours. I do not think so, certainly not very 
 great pain. I question if anything more than trivial 
 pain. (2993.) Last year for purposes of research I 
 think I used about 40 dogs. 
 
 Dr. Ferrier (3256) : Is the number of persons in 
 this county, who perform such experiments for the pro- 
 motion of physiological science, a great number ? 
 — Very few indeed. 
 
 (3272) : I should certainly object to inspection 
 of any kind in my experiments. (3321.) Would 
 have very great disapprobation of inspection. (3326.) 
 I would object to places being licensed, and would 
 allow anybody to perform experiments in his own 
 private laboratory. A great many experimenters live 
 
 * Respecting these statistics of Dr. Burdon Sanderson in 1875, we 
 may say de dcnx choscs I'une. Either they were then false, or else 
 the practice of vivisection has in the intervening six years, according 
 to the Parliamentary Returns of licenses more than trebled its recruits. 
 It is certainly a phenomenon in the way of literary enterprise to think 
 of four gentlemen combining to bring out a couple of costly volumes 
 with illustrations, such as Dr. Burdon Sanderson's Handbook of the 
 Physiological Laboratory , for the exclusive use of thirteen or even 
 sixteen persons. But see last lines of same page for the assertions 
 of Dr. Ferrier — -first that there were "very few " experimenters alto- 
 gether, and secondly that there were " many " who live in the country. 
 
2 3 
 
 in the country and have no access to a public labora- 
 tory. (3327.) Do you think there are man}' such 
 persons ? — Yes. 
 
 Dr. Hoggan (3464) : " This which I hold in my hand 
 is an account which came into my hand only on Satur- 
 day from the British Medical Journal. My mere opinion 
 upon these experiments (Prof. Rutherford's) is that 
 they were very cruel, very painful, and as far as 
 I can see they were useless, and not to be de- 
 pended upon as far as application to man was 
 concerned. Animals, namely dogs, were kept fasting 
 in the first place, for eighteen or nineteen hours, 
 a thing that would never be attempted upon the human 
 being upon whom cholagogues were being administered. 
 Curari was given, a substance the effect of which on 
 the liver has not yet been examined thoroughly, but we 
 know this, that in almost all glands it increases the 
 secretion very much, and would throw matters into an 
 abnormal condition. The animal has been kept under 
 curari when there was no anaesthetic, no narcotic given; 
 no narcotic, indeed, could be given, for there it would 
 interfere, as a separate drug, with the experiment. 
 Therefore, those animals, from the time that they were 
 placed under curari, were kept under curari eight, 
 seven, six, and five hours, suffering pain in consequence 
 of an operation being performed which opened their 
 abdomen, an operation made to find out the bile duct, 
 and separate it from the other structures which lie with 
 it in the gastro-hepatic omentum. A glass canula is 
 then tied in the bile duct, and the bile drops by means 
 of a tube. All that human beings know is the pain there 
 is when gall stones are passing down the bile duct, and 
 that is known to give excessive torture. Merely a little 
 bit of fat passing down gives us intense pain, and we can 
 form an opinion that to take out the duct, to disturb all 
 these parts, and manipulate it, as has been done, would 
 cause more intense pain. And in that condition the animals 
 were kept conscious and fully sensitive (I have any amount 
 of evidence to prove this if there is any doubt about it,) 
 while the experiments were being tried upon them. I 
 say that the conditions were abnormal to such a degree 
 
2 4 
 
 that they could never be applied to men ; and that the 
 pain was excessive ; and that the experiments were 
 uncalled for, and cruel in the extreme ; and I put in a 
 paper by Dr. Rutherford himself, in the British Medical 
 Journal, of October 23rd, as evidence of that point. 
 This view of Dr. Rutherford's only forms another of the 
 numerous opposing views on the same question; agreeing 
 on one point only with the committee who sat in the 
 same university, and the professor who was in the same 
 chair before him a few years ago (and under whom I 
 received my tuition), namely, that mercury had no 
 effect on dogs. Nearly the whole medical profession 
 agree that it has a great effect on human beings. So 
 that the only point on which these people agree, after all 
 their cruel experiments, is, that what is applicable to 
 the dog is not applicable to man. (Dr. Hoggan, in a 
 second examination, having produced the French copy 
 of Paul Bert's observations on a curarized dog in 
 the Archives de Physiologie, Vol. II., p. 650, 1869, made 
 the following remarks): (41 11.) In this experiment 
 a dog was first rendered helpless and incapable of 
 any movement, even of breathing, which function 
 was performed by a machine blowing through a 
 hole in its windpipe. All this time, however, ' its 
 intelligence its sensitiveness, and its will remained 
 intact ; a condition accompanied by the most atrocious 
 sufferings that the imagination of man can conceive ' 
 (vide Claude Bernard in Revue dcs Deux Mondes, 1st 
 September, 1864, pp. 173, 182, 183, &c.) In this con- 
 dition the side of the face, the side of the neck, the 
 side of the fore-leg, the interior of the belly and the hip, 
 were dissected out in order to lay bear respectively the 
 sciatic, the splanchnics, the median, the pneumo-gastric 
 and sympathetic, and the infra-orbital nerves. These 
 were excited by electricity for ten consecutive hours, 
 during which time the animal must have suffered 
 unutterable torment unrelieved even by a cry. The 
 inquisitors then left for their homes, leaving the 
 tortured victim alone with the clanking engine working 
 upon it, till death came in the silence of the night, and 
 set the sufferer free. 
 
 
[ 
 
 25 
 
 Dr. Klein " ;: (3538): What is your own practice with 
 regard to the use of anaesthetics in experiments that 
 are otherwise painful ? — Except for teaching purposes, 
 for demonstration, I never use anaesthetics, where it is 
 not necessary for convenience. If I demonstrate, I 
 use anaesthetics. If I do experiments for my inquiries 
 in pathological research, except for convenience sake, 
 as for instance on dogs and cats, I do not use them. 
 
 * To appreciate the full importance of the testimony of this witness 
 the following facts must be borne in mind, mentioned by the Royal 
 Commission in their Report. " Dr. Emanuel Klein was Assistant 
 Professor at the laboratory of the Brown Institution (a charitable 
 institution, intended by the founder for the merciful treatment of sick 
 animals), and lecturer on General Histology at St. Bartholomew's 
 Hospital. Dr. Klein has acted in the investigations which have been 
 conducted under the Medical Officer of the Privy Council, and is 
 author of the first part of the celebrated Handbook of the Physiological 
 Laboratory. The proof of his evidence was sent to him in the usual 
 course for his corrections. This he returned with alterations, which 
 appeared to us to be so much at variance with the letter and spirit of 
 the answers he had given us at his examination, that we felt ourselves 
 unable to receive as an authentic report of his evidence. In conse- 
 quence of this refusal he requested permission to withdraw the 
 evidence. We have thought that this course would not be right." 
 Report, p. 7. 
 
 Dr. Klein had been entrusted by Mr. Simon (Medical Officer 
 to the Privy Council, who has the expenditure of the annual 
 grant of ^"2,000 for scientific purposes) with making certain patho- 
 logical investigations on animals ; and it appears that Mr. Simon 
 gave him only " general instructions " on the subject, and did not 
 convey to him the rule laid down in Mr. Forster's Minute. " that in 
 any severely painful operation chloroform is to be administered for 
 any experiment connected with the Privy Council" (3650). 
 
 Carrying these facts with us, Dr. Klein's candid avowals appear 
 to cast painful light on the statements of some English physiolo- 
 gists and their advocates concerning foreign scientific education ; 
 as, for example, Dr. Burdon Sanderson's remark, that he " wishes 
 to see the type of education here more like the type of educa- 
 tion in Germany" (2732), and also on Dr. Gamgee's eulogium 
 on Professor Ludwig, of Leipsic, who, he is " certain, is as 
 cautious in the performance of any experiment on a living 
 animal as any English physiologist that ever lived, and who 
 has been the teacher of nearly all the physiologists in Europe, and 
 has indoctrinated nearly the whole of them in the methods of 
 physiological inquiry " (5418) ; and, finally, Mr. Simon's testimony 
 to the "kindness" of Dr. Burdon Sanderson and Dr. Klein when 
 interrogated, " Whether he did not think that the habit of regarding 
 
26 
 
 On frogs and the lower animals I never use them, 
 (3539.) When you say that you only use them for 
 convenience sake, do you mean that you have noregard 
 at all to the sufferings of the animals ? — No regard at all. 
 (3540.) You are prepared to establish that as a prin- 
 ciple which you approve ? — I think that with regard to 
 an experimenter, a man who conducts special research, 
 and performs an experiment, he has no time, so to 
 speak, for thinking what will the animal feel or suffer. 
 His only purpose is to perform the experiment, to 
 learn as much from it as possible, and to do it as 
 quickly as possible. (3541) Then for your own purposes 
 you disregard entirely the question of the suffering of 
 the animal in performing a painful experiment ?— I do. 
 (3542.) Why do you regard it then when it is for a 
 demonstration ? — Because I know that there is a great 
 deal of feeling against it in this country, and when it is. 
 not necessary, one should not perhaps act against the 
 opinion or the belief of certain individuals of the 
 auditorium. One must take regard of the feelings and 
 opinions of those people before whom one does the 
 
 animals as a mere battery of vital forces on which particular results 
 are to be studied, necessarily to a certain extent produces the effect 
 of diminishing the sympathy with their sufferings ?" — " I think not '*" 
 (1476), said Mr. Simon. " I do not know anywhere a kinder person 
 than Dr. Burdon Sanderson" (1477). " Or than Dr. Klein, for 
 instance ?" asked the Commission. " I have no reason," said 
 Mr. Simon, "to think otherwise of him." These then in brief are 
 the views and practice of a gentleman whom English physiologists 
 invite over to assist them, and to instruct the students in St. 
 Bartholomew's ; and who is charged by Dr. Simon, the Medical Officer 
 of the Privy Council (without any caution on the side of humanity), 
 with carrying out experiments on animals in England at the public 
 expense ! The contrast between this evidence of Dr. Klein, as 
 taken down by the shorthand writer of the Commission, and thar 
 which he afterwards sent in, and which the Commission very 
 properly declined to accept, but printed in their Appendix, is truly 
 diverting and instructive. What a physiologist really thinks, and 
 what after reflection and counsel with his fellow physiologists he 
 desires the public should think he thinks, are here set forth in the 
 most lucid manner. Extracts from the two versions were printed in 
 the original Statement of the Victoria Street Society, side by side, in 
 parallel columns, but would occupy too much space in the present 
 volume. 
 
2 7 
 
 experiment. (3543.) Then am I wrong in attributing to 
 ycu that you separate yourself entirely from the feeling 
 which you observe to prevail in this country in regard 
 to humanity to animals ? — I separate myself as an 
 investigator from myself as a teacher. (3544.) But in 
 regard to your proceedings as an investigator, you are 
 prepared to acknowledge that you hold as entirely in- 
 different the sufferings of the animal which is subjected 
 to your investigation ? — Yes. (3546.) Do you believe 
 that that is a general practice on the Continent, to dis- 
 regard altogether the feelings of the animals ? — I believe 
 so. (3547-) Have you, since you have come to this 
 country, had any proof of what you state now with 
 regard to the different feeling that pervades the inhabi- 
 tants of England with regard to the feelings of the 
 animals on which you operate ? Have you had any 
 instances of the contrary feeling to that which you have 
 just mentioned, on the part of Englishmen, since you have 
 come to this country ? — Yes. there is a good deal of differ- 
 ence. (3548.) You have seen it exhibited ? — Yes. (3549.) 
 Would you give the Commission an instance in 
 which any such feeling has been exhibited ? — I mean 
 with regard to the journals ; the outer)- and agitation 
 carried on in the different journals against the practice 
 of vivisection. There is no such thing abroad ; there 
 the general public takes no view, does not claim to 
 pronounce any criticism or any judgment about 
 scientific teaching or physiology in general. (3553-) 
 But you believe that generally speaking there 
 is a very different feeling in England ? — Not amongst 
 the physiologists; I do not think there is. (3554.) 
 But amongst the people of England do you think 
 there is a very different feeling from what exists 
 upon the Continent on this subject ? — Yes, I think so. 
 (359 1 I have injected pyasmic fluid into the veins 
 of dogs to make them pyaemic. So with cats. Then 
 I have used dogs for producing tuberculosis and 1 
 have used dogs and cats for producing typhoid fever. 
 (3609.) But the animals that were used for these 
 purposes are paid for by the public money ? — For my 
 pathological enquiries only. (3630.) I have per- 
 
28 
 
 formed very painful experiments with reference to 
 artificial tuberculosis because I regard it as very painful 
 to produce a disease coming on very slowly in an animal 
 by injecting into its abdominal cavity a foreign material, 
 but I do not regard it as a painful experiment to 
 inject typhoid fever into an animal. (3631.) You do 
 perform in this laboratory (the Brown) operations 
 which involved a great deal of pain to the animal ? — 
 Yes we do occasionally. Of course they are very few. 
 (3632.) And without any question of emplo}ang anaes- 
 thetics unless it happens to be for your own convenience 
 to do so ? — Yes. (3641.) If it be a large vigorous 
 animal as a dog, we do bind it and fasten. A cat we 
 generally must chloroform. (3642). Why do you not 
 chloroform a dog ? — We chloroform a cat because we 
 are afraid of being scratched. (3643.) Why not a dog ? 
 —If it is a small dog, there is no fear of being bitten by 
 the dog. (3739-) And you think that the view of 
 scientific men on the Continent is your view, that animal 
 suffering is so entirely unimportant compared with scien- 
 tific research that it should not be taken into account 
 at all ? — Yes, except for convenience sake. (Examined 
 by Right Hon. W. E. Forster) : — (3748) : You do 
 not recollect his (Dr. Simon) giving you any words 
 written by me, to this effect, " That no experiments on 
 living animals should be conducted at the cost of the 
 State without the employment of some anaesthetic in 
 case of painful operation, and without a report from 
 time to time by the gentleman conducting the experi- 
 ments, explaining their object and showing their neces- 
 sity for the purpose of discovery." Do you recollect 
 seeing those words ? — No. May I be allowed to say 
 this, that at that time I was not connected directly with 
 Mr. Simon. I was at that time simply an assistant of 
 Dr. Burdon Sanderson, so that Mr. Simon could not 
 have occasion to give me that instruction in an official 
 way. (3749.) When you were put directly under him 
 you had not that minute laid before you, as I under- 
 stand you ? — No. 
 
 Schafer (3801) : Then may I take it that there are a 
 great number of experiments which, supposing a frog 
 
2g 
 
 to be a sensitive animal, must cause a vast deal of pain 
 which are not done under chloroform ? — There is no 
 doubt about it. (3802.) And there is no precaution 
 taken to diminish pain if it suffers pain ? — I think I may 
 say no special precaution. (3853.) Hundreds of animals, 
 if you take animals of all kinds, of rabbits and dogs, 
 I suppose more than a hundred (used annually in 
 Lud wig's laboratory at Leipzig). 
 
 McKendrick (3947) : I do not think a man would be 
 justified in trying various substances upon himself first 
 until he has tried them several times upon animals. 
 (4017.) Probably in these experiments of Professor 
 Rutherford very great pain has been inflicted ? — Yes, I 
 fancy so. 
 
 Mr. Robert Sawyer (4252) : He (Dr. Ferrier) used 
 this expression (at a Lecture at the London Institution, 
 as far as I can remember), " I am afraid to say how 
 many cats I have operated upon in the investigation 
 of this" . . . When he made that observation there 
 was a titter. (4275.) May I ask if he laughed himself 
 (on the above occasion) ? — No, he did not laugh himself, 
 but he smiled ; he looked up in this way, and smiled at 
 the people at the top circle of the theatre. 
 
 Lister (4329) : If you had the alternative of being 
 able to administer chloroform in a given experiment 
 or not, you would think it your duty to administer it ? — 
 If I could attain the object of the experiment as ad- 
 vantageously, but not otherwise. (4420) : Then you 
 would think the experiment which is given in the 
 Handbook before, of raising the temperature of the frog 
 to 35 or 40 Cent., a painful operation ? — I should, 
 relatively to the animal ; but I do not believe the suf- 
 ferings of the frog are deserving of serious consideration. 
 
 Dr. Sibson (4739) : Majendie was a masculine observer 
 
 . . The opposite polarity induced by the ruthless- 
 ness of Majendie caused the over fastidiousness of Sir 
 Charles Bell. 
 
 Dr. Legg (5309) : (His fourth series of experiments 
 was) " On the inoculation of cancer, the animals were 
 chloralized, and then a piece of newly cut out tumour 
 still warm, was introduced under their skin. . . 
 
30 
 
 They lived three or four months and were then killed. 
 Nothing found. 
 
 Dr. Carpenter (5604) : Dr. Brown Sequard who is 
 one of the most humane men I know, has inflicted 
 more animal suffering probably than any man of his 
 time, unless it be some of the recent German experi- 
 menters. 
 
 Dr. Lauder Brunton (5721) Asked : What is the 
 largest number (of animals) used by you in scientific 
 research for a single experiment ? I think the largest 
 number is go that was one series of experiments, I was 
 trying to discover the pathology of cholera. (5724.) 
 You performed this experiment on the go cats under 
 chloroform, I presume? — Yes, under chloroform. I 
 must say however that the animals were allowed to 
 live for four or five hours after they recovered from the 
 operation. (5728.) Have these operations resulted in 
 any beneficial discovery ? — Not yet, they are not 
 finished. (5734. ) How do you procure your cats ? — 
 They are supplied to me by a man. (5735.) Who steals 
 them for the purpose I suppose ? — I make no inquiries. 
 (5747.) How many and what kind of creatures have 
 you used (for investigations on snake poison ?) — All 
 sorts ; rabbits, guinea pigs, frogs, dogs, pigeons, fowls. 
 The number I do not exactly remember. When I 
 said just now that I used go cats, I should have said 
 that was in one series, but I am now at the third series. 
 The number go is not the whole that is included in the 
 investigation. I have used a much larger number for 
 investigating the subject of cholera than go. (5748.) 
 For the snake poison experiments I should think I had 
 used about 150. (5754.) For the purpose of nitrate of 
 amyl experiments you have to expose the arteries ? — 
 Yes. (5755.) And is not that a very painful process ? 
 — I think it is somewhat painful. 
 
 Dr. Gamgee (5383) : " I think that vivisection has 
 been practised almost too little. (5385.) I may say we 
 are making great efforts in Owen's College to encourage 
 qualified persons to engage in physiological research ; 
 and for that purpose we have provided a laboratory, 
 and we have a physiological scholarship." 
 
George Hexry Lewes (6330) : " A great deal of 
 experiment is quite useless, useless because very often 
 it could not prove what is attempted to be proved. One 
 man discovers a fact or publishes an experiment, and 
 instantly all over Europe certain people set to work to 
 repeat it. They will repeat it, and repeat it, and repeat 
 it." 
 
 Mr. Jesse (6453): "I will now quote from the 
 Edinburgh Medical and Surgical Journal, Vol. LXIII., Art. 
 1, ' An Experimental Inquiry into the Pathology and 
 Treatment of Asphyxia,' by John E. Erichsen. (6453) : 
 * Experiment 9. Three mongrel terriers, A, B, C, were 
 property secured. . . . One of the jugular veins 
 of the centre dog was then exposed, and a ligature was 
 passed under it, so that it might be punctured so as to 
 avoid the occurrence of plethora and apoplexy when 
 the carotid arteries of the two lateral dogs were con- 
 nected with the corresponding vessels of the central 
 one. . . . The central dog began to struggle. 
 The lateral dogs were both alive, but evidently enfeebled 
 by loss of blood.' '' (6459.) Mr. Erichsen (Commis- 
 sioner) : " Those experiments were made by me, in 
 conjunction partly with Dr. Sharpey, from a grant. We 
 were appointed in the year 1842 by the British Associa- 
 tion for the Advancement of Science to inquire into 
 the subject of asphyxia. A grant of money was given 
 by that Association for that purpose."* 
 
 * The above Minute illustrates a circumstance which must be 
 deemed rare, if not altogether unique in the annals of State Inquiries. 
 A witness introduces (quite legitimately) a case of apparent abuse of 
 the precise kind the Commission was designed to ferret out and 
 report upon ; when lo ! one of the Commissioners observes, "7 did 
 it!" The judge is commissioned to report upon his own alleged 
 offences ! 
 
32 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 EXTRACTS REFERRING TO THE DEMORA- 
 LIZING EFFECTS OF VIVISECTION ON 
 STUDENTS. 
 
 [On no point concerning which they were 
 questioned did the advocates of vivisection before 
 the Commission exhibit more desire to rebut the 
 accusations laid at their door than in the matter of 
 the conduct of students of physiology. The following 
 weighty replies, however, were furnished by some 
 of the most experienced of the witnesses.] 
 
 Sir Thomas Watson examined (69) : You would think 
 it a reprehensible practice to use experiments upon living 
 animals as an illustration in medical teaching, to use 
 them for teaching a class ? — I do. 
 
 Sir George Burrows (175) : I do not think that an 
 experiment should be repeated over and over again in 
 our medical schools for illustrating what is already 
 established. (199.) Would think it very improper to 
 illustrate medical teaching in classes by experiments on 
 living animals. 
 
 Sir James Paget (283) : When a scientific fact has 
 been fully established, to repeat a painful experiment 
 for the purpose of illustrating the fact to a new class of 
 students is not justifiable? — Certainly not. (363.) 
 Experiments for the purpose of repeating anything 
 already ascertained ought never to be shown to classes. 
 
 Dr. Sharpey (538) : I have no doubt that many physio- 
 logists who have been studying abroad in the schools, 
 particularly at Leipzig and elsewhere, would naturally 
 be induced to introduce methods followed there in this 
 country. 
 
 Professor Rolleston (1287) remarked: " Kingsley 
 
33 
 
 speaks of ' the sleeping devil that is in the heart of 
 every man,' but you may say it is the lower nature 
 which we possess in common with the carnivora. It 
 is just this, that the sight of a living, bleeding and 
 quivering organism most undoubtedly does act in a 
 particular way upon what Dr. Carpenter calls, the 
 emotiono-motor nature in us. I know that many men 
 are superior to it ; but I beg to say that, if we are 
 talking of legislation, we are not to legislate for the 
 good, but for the mass who I submit are not always 
 good." . . . When men are massed together the 
 emotiono-motor is more responsive, it becomes more 
 sensitive to impressions than it is at other times. That 
 of course bears very greatly on the question of inter- 
 ference with vivisections as employed before masses. 
 I know that I am likely to be exceedingly abused for 
 what I have said. 
 
 Dr. Walker (1809) : What I mean to say is that the 
 knowledge of functions is so easily understood by oral 
 instruction and reading, that I do not consider demon- 
 stration to be either necessary or justifiable, and if it 
 was otherwise, allow me to say that the greatest number 
 of physicians and surgeons in practice would be nearly 
 entirely ignorant of physiology. 
 
 Dr. Haughton (1867) : The University of Dublin, in 
 authorising a practical course of histology and physi- 
 ology has expressly prohibited vivisection, and will not 
 recognise the certificates of a school in which it is 
 practised for the purpose of illustrating class lectures 
 or in which the students are permitted to practise it. 
 (1888.) I would shrink with horror from accustoming 
 large classes of young men to the sight of animals under 
 vivisection. I believe that many of them would become 
 cruel and hardened, and would go away and repeat 
 those experiments recklessly. Science would gain 
 nothing, and the world would have let loose upon it a 
 set of young devils. 
 
 Mr. Garrod (1986): I think that for educational 
 purposes quite enough can be taught without the em- 
 ployment of demonstrations by vivisection, and that a 
 perfect understanding to that effect would be very 
 
34 
 
 beneficial to the country. (1992.) Are you speaking of 
 general education or special physiological education ? 
 — My remarks referred to the education of classes in 
 special physiology. 
 
 Pavy (2096) Asked : Can you give any notion of 
 the number of animals that are used in the course of 
 the series of lectures (at Guy's Hospital) ? — I should 
 think perhaps in the course of the session say twenty 
 dogs and eight or ten rabbits. 
 
 Dr. Anthony (2450) : " I believe the more you keep 
 the scenic element away the better. The reason is the 
 existence of a morbid curiosity. There is a morbid 
 curiosity which is known to medical men well with 
 reference to operations of all kinds. There are a certain 
 number of persons who are very fond of coming to see 
 the different operations at the hospitals. I look upon 
 that, and particularly upon the desire of seeing these 
 experiments on animals, as something very, very morbid 
 indeed. (2452.) I think it (demonstrations to students) 
 a bad practice. I think it would be sensational instead 
 of educational. 
 
 Professor Rutherford (2867) : I studied at Berlin 
 chiefly. I had to go there to have a whole course of 
 experiments performed for my special benefit. (2914.) 
 I have studied in Berlin and more recently in Leipzig, 
 and I thought that the practice of vivisection there was 
 exceedingly humane. 
 
 Dr. Klein (3552) Asked : Have they objected (i.e., 
 students to experiments performed for demonstration 
 without anaesthetics) ? — Very seldom, with the excep- 
 tion of one or two it has never happened that they 
 have objected. (3612.) But what experiments you have 
 tried have been tried in the Brown Institution at your 
 own cost, I suppose ? — In my private room. Those 
 that I do for teaching purposes, physiological purposes 
 just referred to, I do in my private room ; I live there. 
 (3626.) Are these pupils of yours in any way connected 
 with the London University ? — No ; they are pupils 
 from different hospitals who wish to enter more closely 
 into the study of microscopical anatomy. (3627.) And 
 in the teaching of those pupils you draw no distinction 
 
35 
 
 between painful experiments and non-painful experi- 
 ments if the students themselves raise no objection to 
 see the animal subjected to pain ?— Yes ; I think that 
 would be quite what I expressed before. (3628.) There- 
 fore an)'- students who come there, so far as your teach- 
 ing and influence are concerned, adopt, I presume, the 
 principle that you have adopted ? — Yes. (3629.) And 
 consider that a physiological inquirer has too much to 
 do to think about the sufferings of the animals ? — Yes. 
 
 Mr. Hayden (4598) : I need scarcely ask you whether 
 for the instruction of students you consider it necessary to 
 perform experiments on living animals ? — My conviction 
 is that it is not necessary ; and furthermore, I may take 
 the liberty of remarking, that I do not think the majority 
 of students profit much by it. 
 
 A written statement by Mr. James B. Mills, 
 M.R.C.V.S., was entered in evidence by Mr. Colam as 
 follows (1687): "Observing from the daily papers 
 that Mr. Ernest Hart alleges that students do not per- 
 form experiments on living animals as an exercise in 
 the prosecution of their studies, I beg to forward to you 
 a summary of my experience in that respect during my 
 college career at Edinburgh. I am a veterinary 
 surgeon, and comparatively unknown, but I feel it my 
 duty to aid your society in repressing unnecessary 
 experimentation ; surveying the past as I do with much 
 regret, so far as I have participated in the practices 
 which I am now compelled to condemn. At Edinburgh 
 the veterinary students and the medical students fre- 
 quently associate for pleasure and for study. During 
 my first term I was admitted only to two private 
 meetings where experiments were conducted by students 
 alone ; but in the following term, having become a 
 senior, I was introduced to a great number of such 
 vivisections, and on some occasions operated myself. 
 The experiments were certainly never designed to 
 discover any new fact, or elucidate any obscure 
 phenomena, but simply to demonstrate the most ordi- 
 nary facts of physiology. Our victims were sometimes 
 dogs, but more frequently cats. Many of the latter 
 were caught by means of a poisoned bait, the animals 
 
36 
 
 being secured whilst suffering from the agonies caused 
 by the poison, when antidotes where applied for their 
 restoration. They were then imprisoned in a cupboard 
 at the students' lodgings, and kept there until a meeting 
 could be arranged. Sometimes the students secured their 
 victims by what is known as a cat hunt, that is a raid on 
 cats by students armed with sticks late at night. I am 
 not prepared to say that the object of the students was 
 to commit cruelty, or that there was any morbid desire 
 to witness pain, but I say emphatically that there was 
 no other motive than idle curiosity and heedless, reck- 
 less love of experimentation. What, for instance, could 
 justify the following experiment, performed for the 
 purpose of witnessing the action of a cat's heart ? The 
 operator first of all made an incision through the skin of 
 the animal's chest extending from the neck to the belly. 
 The skin was then laid back by hooks, in order to 
 enable the operator to cut through the cartilage of the 
 breast bone, and to draw his knife across the ribs for 
 the purpose of nicking them. This process is necessary 
 to enable him to snap the ribs and lay the fractured 
 parts back, which also are secured with hooks. It is 
 needless to say that such operation is a most cruel one; 
 but it is only one of several others performed at Edin- 
 burgh. Now, the action of the heart is well known, and 
 is one of the first things taught to students of physiology, 
 and can be taught as well without experimentation as 
 with. In a few cases the animals were narcotized, 
 when no suffering was caused either in the process of 
 poisoning or in the after experimentations. The securing 
 an animal for an operation like the above, requires 
 experience and care, and it is fearful to witness the 
 struggles of the animal while this is being done. I desire 
 to exonerate the professors from any participation in the 
 experiments performed by students which were conduc- 
 ted at the private lodgings of students, when none but 
 students were present. I merely write this in order to 
 give my humble corroboration of the statement made in 
 the memorial, that students are in the habit of perfor- 
 ming experiments. — James B. Mills, M.R.C.V.S." 
 (4932). 
 
37 
 
 On cross-examination, Mr. Mills confirmed these 
 statements. He said : (4932.) " The experiments " 
 (made chiefly on cats and dogs) " had no other motive 
 than idle curiosity and reckless love of experimen- 
 tation." (4942.) All the students (a class of seventy or 
 eighty) assisted more or less at these experiments. 
 (4948.) They were sometimes done in public in the 
 yard of the college. (4953-) " The habit of doing such 
 things is sure to go on unless a stop is put to it." 
 (4957.) He referred to a special case which occurred 
 last winter session. A horse was bought for the 
 purpose of dissection. This animal was subjected 
 during a whole week to various operations, such as 
 tenotomy and neurotomy, &c. (4960.) The operations 
 were " very painful." (4964.) No anaesthetics of any 
 kind were given. (4059.) The principal must have known 
 that this was done within the precincts of the college. 
 (4966.) The experiments were made " all over the 
 animal." (5071.) Another experiment, shared by Mr. 
 Mills, was on a cat, when six students were present 
 — four veterinary and two medical students. (5074.) 
 The thorax of the cat was opened to see the heart 
 beating. (5082.) No chloroform was administered, and 
 the cat died after seven or eight minutes. A dog, 
 which was first half-poisoned and then restored by an 
 antidote, received " brutal usage." The brains were 
 knocked out by a hammer. (5158.) The landlady of 
 the students threatened to complain when they had 
 killed her cat. 
 
 (The story of the horse was subsequently admitted 
 by Principal Williams (6033) ). 
 
 Dr. Scott (5192) detailed an experiment he witnessed 
 in Edinburgh, in 1871 : " Several frogs were poisoned 
 with curari or courari, which destroys motor power 
 without destroying or even impairing sensibility (some 
 think it even increases it). In that state their bellies 
 were ripped open, the mesentery sufficiently exposed 
 to be placed on the microscope, still in connection 
 with the living animal, and a class of certainly not less 
 than 50 or 60, I should say more like 70 or 80 students, 
 each had his turn at one of the microscopes to examine 
 
38 
 
 the circulation in the mesentery under the circum- 
 stances: the object being, I can hardly say to determine, 
 but to illustrate a point which the professor, Professor 
 Bennet, was very fond of maintaining in opposition to 
 some others." . . . After describing how he ceased 
 to attend the physiological lectures in Edinburgh on 
 account of the cruelty he witnessed, says that " it 
 did not provoke the slightest symptoms of abhorrence 
 among those who witnessed it." He "never knew an 
 operation cause the least abhorrence to a medical 
 student." (5201.) Vivisection, he believes, goes on 
 among students in their own rooms. (5238.) " In 
 Edinburgh certainly: in London he thought : and 
 there was one at Edinburgh who used to speak of 
 vivisection on frogs which he performed in his own 
 room." 
 
39 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 EXTRACTS ILLUSTRATING THE CONFUSION 
 AND CONTRADICTION PREVAILING CON- 
 CERNING ANAESTHETICS. 
 
 [The fallacy of the repeated assertion of physiolo- 
 gists that the great majority of vivisections are 
 rendered entirely painless by the complete anaesthesia 
 of the victims, is illustrated by the following 
 extracts : — ] 
 
 Prof. Pritchard (Prof. Anatomy Royal Veterinary 
 College) (797) : With regard to dogs, I should never 
 think of applying chloroform at all. I should think it 
 very unsafe to do so. They appear for some time not 
 to be under the influence of it at all, and then suddenly 
 they come under the influence of it, and we find it 
 impossible to bring them round. (846.) (Asked) : Have 
 you formed any idea as to the comparative sensitiveness 
 to pain of different animals ? — I have performed some 
 thousands of operations on them, and I have never yet 
 been able to detect any difference in sensation between 
 the skin of either one or the other and the human 
 subject, beyond this, that the cuticle or external covering 
 of the skin is thicker in some animals than in others, 
 and of course the knife has to penetrate deeper to reach 
 the sensitive structure, but when once it has reached it 
 I think it is as sensitive in one animal as in the other. 
 (847.) Has never seen anything to make him think 
 differently than that as regards the physical sensation of 
 pain it would be equal to that in a human being. 
 
 Sir W. Fergusson (1080) : An experiment at the 
 time of an animal being insensible is really of little or 
 no value. Asked (1082) : You think that the fact that 
 the animal was under at least the temporary influences 
 of a powerful poison would throw great doubt upon 
 the whole nature of the experiment ? Upon the value 
 of the experiment I think it would. 
 
4o 
 
 Dr. Walker (1810) : When an experimenter says, for 
 example as is said in a very recent publication, that 
 " before and throughout these experiments anaesthetics 
 were used " it is perfectly true ; but if by that you 
 choose to understand that while the animal lived and 
 was experimented on he was throughout insensible, it 
 is the greatest delusion that ever was. 
 
 Dr. Garrod (2007) : In giving chloral to a ruminant 
 animal, the same dose that would anaestheticise a horse 
 or donkey will not ansestheticise a ruminant animal. 
 
 Dr. Burdon Sanderson (2298) : With regard to experi- 
 ments on inflammation, even the most simple ones 
 cannot be done without the production of a certain 
 amount of pain, because pain is one of the phenomena 
 of inflammation. (2299.) Does that imply that the 
 experiment cannot be performed under anaesthetics ? 
 — With anaesthetics as regards many other operations 
 perhaps, but still without anaesthetics as regards the 
 process itself. You cannot produce an inflammation 
 in an animal and maintain a state of anaesthesia during 
 the whole of the process. It is quite impossible. 
 
 Dr. Rutherford (2843) : I should think that about half 
 the experiments that I have done (were on animals not 
 rendered insensible). 
 
 Mr. Schafer(3839): Can you describe to us any experi- 
 ments in which you would give curari and not opium ? 
 — One would give curari and not opium in certain 
 experiments which might be necessary to make in 
 researches upon the nervous system, for instance, in 
 researches upon the nerves which govern the blood 
 vessels. (3840.) Now in experiments on arterial pressure 
 would you give curare and not opium ? — In some we 
 should. (3842). They (the above experiments) might 
 last a few minutes or they might last an hour or two. 
 
 Mr. Lister (4335) : How long would it take to put a 
 dog under chloroform ? — I could not say exactly — not a 
 very long time. 
 
 Dr. Lauder-Brunton (5771): Do you regard opium 
 as an anaesthetic or only an hypnotic ? — As an 
 anaesthetic assuredly. (5772.^ Is it in moderate doses 
 an anaesthetic? — Yes I should say so decidedly. (5778.) 
 
4 1 
 
 Can you keep the dog under chloroform during an 
 anaesthetic? — Yes, I should say so decidedly.* (5778.) 
 Can you keep the dog under chloroform during the whole 
 of that (very long) experiment ? — Perfectly well. (5779.) 
 Have you any special assistant for that purpose ? — Yes, 
 we do not want a trained assistant, but just the ordinary 
 laboratory servants. (5803.) Dr. Pavy told us that 
 the effects of poison by strychnine could be shown under 
 chloroform, and that he did show them in his class under 
 chloroform. Would that in your opinion show them 
 efficiently ? — I do not think it would, because chloroform 
 has been used as an antidote to strychnine. (See Pavy 
 
 2I43-) 
 
 Mr. Williams (6088) : Is the operation of giving 
 anaesthetics to horses a difficult one ? — It is very 
 difficult. 
 
 * A grim comment on Prof. Lauder Brunton's decided anaesthetic 
 is to be found in the most authoritative recent treatise on physiology, 
 Claude Bernard's last great work " La Physiologie Operatoire," Paris, 
 1879, p. 155. Speaking of Morphia, he says that the animal after a 
 large dose remains still sensitive. " Place a terre le chien peut encore 
 se mcuvoir, marcher, aller se cacher ; place dans la gouttiere a 
 vivisection il y demeure immobile et stupefie, jamais il ne cherche a 
 mordre,quelque operation qu"cn luifasse subir ; il sent la douleur mais 
 il a pour ainsi dire perdu l'idee de la defense." 
 
42 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 EXTRACTS EXHIBITING THE VIEWS OF 
 VIVISECTORS ON THE PAINLESSNESS 
 OF STARVATION, BAKING AND BOILING 
 TO DEATH, FEVER, JAUNDICE, &>c, AND- 
 OTHER NOTEWORTHY OPINIONS. 
 
 I" That none are so deaf as those who will not 
 hear " is an old aphorism which might be supple- 
 mented by the observation, that nothing is a sign 
 of pain to those who, for their own reasons, do not 
 choose to recognise pain. If the victim of the 
 most horrible mutilation or poison writhes, 
 struggles, groans, shrieks, it is all mere " unconscious 
 muscular contractions " and " convulsion." Kit re- 
 mains still, paralysed by agony, its motionlessness is 
 interpreted to signify that it is unconscious. Here 
 are a few out of many similar attempts to befool 
 with scientific jargon the Commissioners and the 
 public] 
 
 Professor Humphry (speaking of pathological experi- 
 ments and artificially induced disease) : I do not 
 imagine that disease in an animal is so painful as in 
 man. 
 
 Professor Pavy (2159): But I suppose the healthy 
 frog suffers very much the experience of being put into 
 boiling water ? — I should think not. The temperature 
 is gradually risen, and before the frog would experience 
 the effect which would be experienced by being put 
 into boiling water, the sensibility would become 
 altogether destroyed. (2162.) The evidence is that the 
 frog made great efforts to escape which I suppose 
 means that the frog suffered a good deal ? — I do not 
 
43 
 
 know that you must interpret it in that way. There 
 may be a physical action on the muscles causing those 
 efforts. 
 
 Mr. Sibson (4682) : Now when animals are so affected, 
 is it necessary to keep them in distress for a long period 
 of time ? — Of course if it is to enquire into a disease like 
 the cattle plague, the disease must run its course ; if 
 it is to enquire into diphtheria, erysipelas, small-pox, 
 and the various diseases of that class that have been 
 enquired into clearly, each of them must run its course. 
 But I need not tell your Lordships that the process of a 
 disease is not one of constant pain, but very much the 
 reverse in most instances. (4684.) The suffering from 
 erysipelas is not great. Scarlet fever gives no pain. 
 Certainly if it attacks the throat it does, but that disease 
 is not given in experiments. (4732.) Tuberculosis is not 
 a painful disease, but the very reverse. (4745.) Asked 
 if he would deny that the sufferings involved in raising 
 the temperature of animals till they died would be very 
 severe ? — " That is a question that I happen to have 
 paid a great deal of attention to, and I am not of opinion 
 that it would produce great suffering." (4750.) Thinks, 
 nevertheless, that Goltz's experiment of boiling a frog 
 to death is a " horrible idea." (4751.) Asked whether 
 he would say the same of Chossat's experiments of 
 starving animals to death, that very little suffering was 
 involved in these experiments ? — " I am very familiar 
 with these experiments ; I have been over them again 
 and again, and I would say the very same of those, that 
 there was very little suffering inflicted on those animals 
 by the process of starvation which they were subjected 
 to by Chossat." (4760.) Asked, if supposing that curari 
 is in no respect an anaesthetic, he would say that a 
 painful operation, lasting half-an-hour, and followed by 
 experiments, in which the bile-ducts are acted on by 
 medicines during eight and a half hours more, would be 
 very painful or not? — " I do not think they would be 
 very painful." (4787.) Asked whether the earlier stages 
 of starvation are not painful ? says, " I do not know. 
 There must be some discomfort undoubtedly ; but it is 
 a very slight discomfort, I imagine." (4789.) Asked 
 
44 
 
 whether, when sailors are exposed to the process of 
 starvation from the loss of their vessel, what they go 
 through can only be described as discomfort or incon- 
 venience and does not merit the name of extreme pain ? 
 answers, " I should say so, certainly." 
 
 Dr. Wickham Legg (5270) Asked : Mostly I find 
 that the sixteen cats (operated on by Dr. Legg) linger 
 for various periods, sometimes for eight, ten, seventeen, 
 and twenty-three days ; they linger during a period in 
 which they appear to have been very much diseased. 
 I suppose they were all very much diseased as the 
 result of the operation? — Undoubtedly. (5271.) Were 
 the diseases of a painful kind or not? — Judging from 
 what we see in them jaundice is not a painful disease. 
 (5276.) Take one case — Black Tom cat, weighing 6 lbs. 
 i£ oz., January gth, died January 25th weight only 
 3 lbs. 7tr oz. That is to say, it lived sixteen days, 
 wasting all the time. Do you consider that that kind 
 of wasting is a painful thing ? — I should think not from 
 what we see in man. (5281.) Take this case. Experi- 
 ment 16 : Black and white cat, bile-duct tied- and 
 piece cut out, July 3rd. As the cat was now very weak 
 and seemed about to die, it was determined to perform 
 the diabetic puncture. The cat was therefore laid prone, 
 a cut made through the skin over the occipital pro- 
 tuberance, and the chisel applied immediately under- 
 neath this. Now is that puncture a painful operation? 
 or was it performed under chloroform ? — It wav 
 performed % under chloroform, and I doubt whether it be 
 painful, because as soon as it comes out of the chloro- 
 form it lies in a helpless state and does not move at all, 
 nor does it give any signs of feeling. (5288.) There was 
 an uncertainty it seems about the time that several of 
 them (the cats) died ? — I did not go down on Sundays 
 you must remember.* 
 
 Sir W. Gull (5489) observes : "I will answer 
 the question another way. Would it be considered 
 rie'ht to take an unwilling: man and an innocent 
 
 * Was there ever such a comment as this on the precept, " Remem- 
 ber to keep holy the Sabbath day? " 
 
45 
 
 person and slaughter him for the public safety? — Yes, 
 decidedly. It is done every day in war ; you take an 
 unwilling man and you slaughter him for the public 
 safety. I see no reason in the nature of things why an 
 animal should not be slaughtered for the public good — 
 for the teaching of science — if it should so seem fit to a 
 man in whose intention I had confidence. (5499.) I 
 may observe that noticing the number of clergy whose 
 names are appended to a public address on this subject 
 and reflecting what motive (for knowledge it could not 
 have been) could have actuated them, I thought I 
 could see the same spirit as animated the Papal 
 authority in the repression of intellectual progress. 
 
 Dr. Carpenter (5603) Asked : Would you justify the 
 infliction of any amount of pain for a sufficient scientific 
 purpose,? — -I should certainly justify for a well con- 
 sidered purpose, if the pain could not be avoided. 
 (5604.) My question was whether you would scruple to 
 inflict any amount of agony ? — I do not see where you 
 are to draw the line. 
 
 Dr. Handyside (5994) (After detailing long physio- 
 logical experience) : Fourthly, I have had experience, 
 as being requested to undertake the office of Honorary 
 Secretary of the Scottish Society for Prevention of 
 Cruelty to Animals in 1839, and having much sympathy 
 with these animals, I felt there was nothing inconsistent 
 with this in my practising vivisection. 
 
 Mr. George Henry Lewes (6356) : I think there 
 are few people who perform experiments at all in 
 England. I wish there were many more. (6379.) 
 (Asked) : You said that you had performed many 
 hundreds of experiments and some of them extremely 
 painful ? . . . Well it is always distressing to hear the 
 cries of the animal or witness its struggles, to me 
 especially being very fond of animals, and so much so 
 that I could not see experiments on dogs. 
 
4 5 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 EXTRACTS ADMITTING THE FAILURES AND 
 USELESSNESS OF VIVISECTION. 
 
 [This concluding chapter of extracts is a short 
 one. Very few of the witnesses were willing to 
 admit, even in the smallest point, that their favourite 
 Method had proved a failure. The following 
 passages however so far as they go are worthy of 
 preservation : — ] 
 
 Sir Thomas Watson Asked (57) : Does it follow 
 that because any drug would be poisonous to a dog it 
 would necessarily be poisonous to a man ?— No, not at 
 all. (58.) I think you said you had no great faith in 
 experiments made of the effects of drugs on animals ? — 
 No ; I should not have any faith in such experiments. 
 
 Professor Pritchard (893) : Did 3^ou find that any of 
 your experiments succeeded with a view to stopping or 
 alleviating the cattle-plague ? — No ; they entirely failed. 
 (900.) Has no belief that any future experiments may 
 tend to the cure of the cattle-plague. (906.) The ex- 
 periments on pleuro-pneumonia have not led to any 
 decided results at present. (908.) Does not think that 
 the use of drugs on animals can be taken as a guide to 
 the doses or the action of the same drugs on human 
 subjects. 
 
 Sir W. Fergusson (1032): I cannot think that they 
 (experiments on the lower animals) have led to the 
 mitigation of pain in the human subject. (1092.) I 
 have thought over it again and again and have not been 
 able to come to a conclusion in my own mind that there 
 is any single operation in surgery which has been 
 initiated by the performance of something like it on the 
 lower animals. (1103.) In your opinion is clinical 
 
47 
 
 and pathological observation of more service to prac- 
 tical surgery than experimental physiology ? — Yes, 
 there is a precision in the one while the other is largely 
 theoretical. (1108.) Did I rightly understand you that 
 Mr. Jones' experiments on ligatures had not determined 
 the question at all of the kind of ligature best suited 
 for the arteries ? — That is so. The controversy has 
 been going on ever since, and variety of opinion still 
 exists. (1049.) I am not aware of any of these ex- 
 periments on the lower animals having led to the 
 mitigation of pain, or to improvements as regards 
 surgical details. 
 
 Dr. Swayne Taylor (1171) : A very eminent (French) 
 toxicologist was in the habit of experimenting on dogs 
 on a very large scale indeed, and after giving the poisons 
 — nearly every poison in the list that we know of — he 
 cut into the neck to tie their gullets to prevent the 
 animal vomiting, and of course that must have caused 
 great pain and suffering ; and it defeated the object 
 which the toxicologist ought to have in view, because it 
 placed the animal in an unnatujal condition. . . . For 
 that reason, in my work on Toxicology, I have not been 
 able to make any use of the hundreds of these experi- 
 ments which this French physician performed. (1197.) 
 In Palmer's case, the destruction of sixty animals was 
 really quite unnecessary. It was merely an attempt to 
 overwhelm the evidence for the prosecution by the 
 number of experiments. (1178.) And you think that 
 many experiments are resorted to which are evidently 
 useless for those purposes (i.e., either in regard to 
 medicine or jurisprudence), and which inflict a great 
 deal of unnecessary torture upon the animals that are 
 subjected to them ? — Yes I do. I would apply this 
 observation more to French experimenters than English. 
 (1205.) Do you imagine that experiments are likely to 
 do much good for this purpose (i.e., to find cures for 
 snake bites) ? — No, I do not. I have read them all 
 with great care. 
 
 Prof. Rolleston (1280): A rabbit will eat as much 
 belladonna as would poison a large number of men, 
 and yet it will not act upon the rabbit in the least. 
 
Mr. Macilwain, F.R.C.S. (1852) Asked: We under- 
 stand you to say that you mention the case of Mr. 
 Travers' experiments upon animals in regard to 
 strangulated hernia as a proof that such experiments 
 may not only not lead in the right direction, but may 
 be absolutely misleading ? — Yes. (1857.) I only repudiate 
 vivisection as one of the fallacies of medical investiga- 
 tion. 
 
 Dr. Haughton (874): "I believe that a large propor- 
 tion of the experiments now performed upon animals 
 in England, Scotland and Ireland, are unnecessary 
 and clumsy repititions of well-known results. Young 
 physiologists in England learn German and read experi- 
 ments in German journals, and repeat them in this 
 country." 
 
49 
 
 INDEX 
 
 SHOWING NAMES AND QUALIFICATIONS OF WITNESSES 
 CITED IN THESE EXTRACTS, AND THE PAGES IN 
 WHICH THEIR EVIDENCE APPEARS. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Dr. Aclanu, Regius Professor of Medicine at Oxford, President 
 
 of the Medical Council .. .. .. .. .. n, 16 
 
 Dr. Anthony, Pupil of Sir Charles Bell .. .. .. 21, 34 
 
 Sir George Burrows, President of the Royal College of 
 
 Physicians .. .. .. .. .. 11, 32, 36 
 
 Dr. Burdon-Sanderson, Professor of Human Physiology, 
 
 University College, London .. .. .. 12, 21, 40 
 
 Dr. Carpenter, Registrar of London University 13, 30, 45 
 
 Sir William Fergusson, Sergeant-Surgeon to the Queen 
 
 17. 39. 46 
 Dr. Ferrier, Professor of Forensic Medicine, King's College, 
 
 London . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 
 
 Dr. Michael Foster, Praelector of Physiology at Trinity 
 
 College, Cambridge . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 
 
 Alfred Henry Garrod. Esq., Prosector of the Zoological 
 
 Society of London .. .. .. .. .. 33, 40 
 
 Dr. Gamgee, Brockenbury Professor of Physiology at Owen's 
 
 College, Manchester . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 
 
 Sir William Gull, late Teacher of Physiology at Guy's 
 
 Hospital .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 13, 44 
 
 Professor Humphry, Professor of Anatomy at the University 
 
 of Cambridge .. .. .. .. .. 15, 16, 42 
 
 Dr. Handyside, Teacher of Anatomy at the Edinburgh School 
 
 of Medicine . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 
 
 Rev. Samuel Haughton, Medical Registrar, School of Physic, 
 
 Trinity College, Dublin.. .. .. .. .. 33, 48 
 
 Thomas Hayden, Esq., Professor of Anatomy and Physiology 
 
 at the Catholic University of Ireland. . .. .. 35 
 
 Dr. Hoggan, M.B. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . 23 
 
 G. R. Jesse, Esq. .. .. .. .. .. .. 31 
 
 Dr. Klein, Assistant Professor at the Brown Institute, and 
 Lecturer on Histology at the Medical School, St. Bartholo- 
 mew's Hospital .. .. .. .. .. .. 25, 34 
 
zy, 
 31. 
 
 4 u 
 
 45 
 
 at the 
 
 
 29, 
 
 40 
 
 
 48 
 
 in the 
 
 
 
 29 
 
 
 35 
 
 50 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Dr. Lauder-Brunton, Lecturer on Materia Medica at St. 
 
 Bartholemew's Hospital. . .. .. .. .. 30, 40 
 
 Dr. Wickham Legg, Demonstrator of Morbid Anatomy at St. 
 
 Bartholomew's Hospital.. 
 George Henry Lewes, Esq. 
 Joseph Lister, Esq., Professor of Clinical Surgery 
 
 University of Edinburgh 
 George Macilwain, Esq., London Practioner . . 
 John G. McKendrick, Esq., Lecturer on Physiology 
 
 Extra-Academical School of Edinburgh 
 James B. Mills, Esq. 
 Sir James Paget, President of the Medical and Chirurgical 
 
 Society .. .. .. .. .. .. .. n, 32 
 
 Dr. Pavy, Physician at Guy's Hospital, and Lecturer on 
 
 Physiology .. .. .. .. .. 12, 34, 42 
 
 Professor Pritchard, Professor of Anatomy at the Royal 
 
 Veterinary College . . . . . . . . . . 39, 46 
 
 Dr. Pye-Smith, Assistant Physician at Guy's Hospital and 
 
 Lecturer on Physiology .. .. .. .. .. ..12 
 
 Robert Sawyer, Esq., M.D. . . . . . . . . 29 
 
 Dr. Scott . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 
 
 Edward A. Schafer, Esq., Assistant Professor of Physiology in 
 
 University College .. .. .. .. 15, 28, 40 
 
 Dr. Sibson, Consulting Pysician to St. Mary's Hospital 15, 28, 40 
 John Simon Esq., Medical Officer of the Privy Council and 
 
 Local Government Board .. .. .. .. ..12 
 
 William Sharpey, Esq., Professor of Physiology in University 
 
 College, London (for 30 years) . . . . 14, 16, 32 
 
 Dr. Swayne Taylor, Lecturer on Medical Jurisprudence at 
 
 Guy's Hospital . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 
 
 Dr. De Noe Walker .. .. .. .. .. 33, 40 
 
 Sir Thomas Watson, President of Royal College of Physcians 
 
 11, 32, 46 
 Professor Williams, Principal of the New Veterinary College, 
 
 Edinburgh .. .. .. .. .. .. 15, 41 
 
 Printed by Petvteess & Co., 15, Great Queen Street, London, W.C. 
 
A PROBLEM. 
 
 se^r^f^ UP ° n a remark With ref — <* to vivi- 
 section, but they have no souls. " 
 
 Come Carlo, dear four-footed friend 
 And look at me that I may trace ' 
 Once more that glance of loving lio-ht 
 
 Which lends such beauty to thyface. 
 But whence it comes, and what it means 
 Can take small place in Nature's roll • ' 
 Ihy gaze is but atonic play, 
 
 For Carlo, dear, thou hast no soul. 
 Give me thy p aw ; 'tis trustier far 
 
 Than many a hand of human mould; 
 And greet me with thy honest tongue 
 
 Which never a human lie has told 
 And yet thy steadfastness and truth 
 
 'Twere idle folly to extol ; 
 They're only matter's fleeting form 
 
 For, Carlo, dear, thou hast no soul. 
 There let my vivisecting knife 
 
 Slow make thee, dumb, and maimed, and blind • 
 Thy torture weighs not in the scale ' 
 
 Matter must be the store of mind' 
 Ah ! God, that look ; that piteous cry 
 
 What is this thought beyond control 9 
 Can Science be a cruel lie, 
 And faithful Carlo have a soul? 
 
 —L. H. E. in London Zoophilist. 
 
DUKE MED. CENTER LIB. 
 HISTORICAL COLLECTION