that before any legislation is undertaken or new regulations framed, the advocates of vivisection should be taken into counsel and should have every opportunity afforded to them for expressing their opinions.

Finally, I wish to say a few words on the special question of experiments on dogs, as to which a large section of the public are deeply interested. This subject is treated on pp. 62-63 of the Report. The Commissioners were divided in opinion, but the majority held that "the special enactments now applicable to horses, asses, and mules might be extended to dogs, and also to cats and anthropoid apes."

It is, of course, "logically untenable "

(p. 62) to exclude any particular class of animals from being the subject of experiment. On the other hand, almost from the dawn of history' dogs have always been regarded as the special friends of man. Nowhere probably does this feeling prevail more strongly than in this country. Without doubt, it is a feeling based on sentiment, but neither scientists nor any other class

· εἰσὶ καὶ κυνῶν ἐρινύες — There is vengeance in heaven for an injured dog." Gilbert Murray, "Rise of the Greek Epic," p. 87.

of persons can afford to neglect sentiment. I should be sorry to see dogs altogether excluded from experiment. I cannot doubt that, by their exclusion, the cause of science would suffer. Prof. Starling, an eminently humane man, said that if dogs were excluded "it would stop all the more advanced observations on digestion, experiments as to the nature of diabetes, and other important cases." 1 Further, the experiments so far conducted on dogs have produced excellent results in the direction of facilitating the treatment of canine diseases. An instance in point is Dr. Copeman's discovery of a vaccine against distemper. Another instance is that the cause of malignant jaundice in dogs has been ascertained, and that the disease can now be treated with far greater prospects of success than heretofore. Moreover, were all experiments on dogs prohibited, the only result, in so far as the dogs themselves are concerned, would be that a few of them, instead of being put to a painless death in the physiological laboratory, would enter a lethal chamber at Battersea or elsewhere. But I think the proposal made by the majority of the Commission to the effect that the legal

'See Mr. Paget's Summary of the Evidence, p. 47.

position of dogs should be assimilated to that of horses and mules might reasonably be adopted. At present, under Section 5 of the Act of 1876, no special certificate is required in the case of a dog unless it be proposed either to dispense with the use of anæsthetics, or to keep the animal alive for observation after the effect of the anesthetic has passed off; whereas in the case of a horse, ass, or mule, a special certificate is invariably required, whether anæsthetics be used or not. If the recommendation of the Commission be adopted, this distinction would disappear. A certificate would always be required before conducting any experiment on a dog.

Such, briefly, are the conclusions at which I have arrived after a careful perusal of the Report of the Royal Commission.

Ill-health and advancing years oblige me to resign the Presidency of the Research Defence Society, but I cannot abandon a work in which I have taken the deepest interest, and in which I have been fortunate enough to be associated with men of profound learning and lofty aspirations, without making a final appeal to the main body of my countrymen and countrywomen. I beg them not to

be scared by the ugly sound of the word Vivisection. I ask them, before being led away by a very natural but, I firmly believe in this case, a misplaced sentiment, to study the facts for themselves by the light of the information now placed at their disposal. Should they comply with this request, I am confident that any preconceived prejudice against the proceedings of the Vivisectionists will be removed. They will find that the appeal to their love of animals has often been made on erroneous statements of fact, and they will come to the conclusion that, under proper safeguards-which none less than myself would wish to see abolished-not only may the practice of vivisection be allowed to continue, but that its arrest would be disastrous to the further progress of humanitarian science in this country.

36, WIMPOLE STREET, W.,

March 27, 1912.

CROMER.

FOR AND AGAINST EXPERIMENTS ON ANIMALS

I

THE ACT OF 1876

THE present Act was founded on the recommendations of a Royal Commission, appointed in June 1875 "to inquire into the practice of subjecting live animals to experiments for scientific purposes, and to consider and report what measures, if any, it may be desirable to take in respect of any such practice." The Commissioners were Lord Cardwell (Chairman), Lord Winmarleigh, Mr. W. E. Forster, Sir John Karslake, Professor Huxley, Sir John Erichsen, and Mr. R. H. Hutton; with Mr. Nathaniel Baker (Secretary). Between July and December 1875, fifty-three witnesses were examined, and 6,551 questions were put and answered; and the Report of the Commission bears date January 8, 1876. Thus, the whole work of the Commissioners was done within seven months.

AN ACT TO AMEND THE LAW RELATING TO CRUELTY TO ANIMALS

Vict. 39 & 40, c. 77

15th August, 1876

Whereas it is expedient to amend the law relating to cruelty to animals by extending it to the cases of animals