Report of the Royal Commission on the practice of subjecting live animals to experiments for scientific purposes : with minutes and evidence and appendix / presented to both Houses of Parliament by command of her Majesty.

  • Great Britain. Royal Commission on Vivisection (1875)
Date:
1876
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Report of the Royal Commission on the practice of subjecting live animals to experiments for scientific purposes : with minutes and evidence and appendix / presented to both Houses of Parliament by command of her Majesty. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by Royal College of Physicians, London. The original may be consulted at Royal College of Physicians, London.

    35/1052 (page 5)
    respect to the functions of the nervous system by Sir Charles Bell and by Dr. Marshall Hall. 105. I do not mean good results, but do you think that the practice has largely increased in the profession of studying by this mode?—I do not know. 106. {Lord Winmarleigh.') You said that you had no knowledge Avhatever of the extent to which what you have termed vivisection is carried on in England ? —No, I have not; but I am confident that there cannot be many persons in this country who are qualified, or who ought to b« allowed, to perform, such experiments as are under discussion now. 107. Have you ever considered in your own mind how, supposing some legislative enactment was to be passed, the object of limiting it to competent persons, could be best carried out ?—I cannot say that I have given much consideration to that subject, but it strikes me that any persons who should prosecute physio- logical knowledge by experiments on animals, ought (o be such persons only as migiit be licensed by some high authority to do it. 108. You would have no other restriction placed upon them, as to the necessity of having a witness by on Ijehalf of the public ?—I have not considered what the precautions should be, but only how the experiments might be licensed or allowed. 109. Would you allow anybody who possessed a license of that kind to perform these experiments at his own discretion ?—Yes, I think so, if he were licensed by some high authority, which authority was well advised by some responsible person. 110. Wliat person ?—I am thinking of the Inspector of Schools of Anatomy. He is a person who exists now, and who is the adviser, I imagine, of the authority; I do not know of what high authority, whether it is the Home Secretary or not. 111. Would you restrict the issuing of licenses to that one authority, or would you phice it in the 'College of Physicians or Surgeons; or in what central authority would you place the power of issuing them ?—I think it should be in some liigh authority, such as one of the Secretaries of State, properly advised by a responsible officer as to tlie eligibility of the person who seeks the license. 112. {Chairman.') Subject to the usual practice of this country as regards responsibility to Parliament} —I may perhaps be quite wrong and presumptuous in saying so, but it seems to me that this vivisection question is scarcely a fit one for discussion in a popular assembly like the Houses of Parliament.'- I think it could hardly be debated without giving rise to much misapprehension and prejudice, and angry passionate feelings which had better be avoided altogether. 113. {Lord Winmarleigh.) What should be the nature of the authority which tke Secretary of State should rely on?—He should rely on the responsible officer to whom I have alluded, such as exists now as Inspector of the Schools of Anatomy, who regulates the supply of subjects for dissection. 114. Is that a very high authority in the medical world ?—Yes. 115. Is that a higher authority, for instance, than the President of the College of Surgeons, or the President of the College of Physicians ?—I think that it would be a very invidious task for either of those persons to undertake. 116. {Mr. Erichscn.) You would have an inspector of physiological laboratories as you noAv have an inspector of dissecting rooms and schools of anatomy ? —Yes ; I think that would be a great safeguard ;. and I think that with such safeguard it might be pretty safely left to the honour and conscience and humanity ' of the experimenters themselves. I would rather that it should be left in that way than that they should l)e restrained by the fetters of a statute Avhich might bo, perhaps, more easily evaded. 117. {Mr. Forster.) You are aware that a great deal of the feeling about this matter in this country arises from the belief, whether well founded or not, that these experiments are tried very frequently on a great number of animals in some places on the con- tinent, do you think that it is more practised by physicians or surgeons or by men of science on the continent than it is in England ?—I think so from what I read and hear, but I have no exact knowledge on that subject. 118. [Chairman.) When you speak of a license being given, for instance, by the Home Secretary, on proper advice, to anybody to perform an experimeut, do you mean that he should become a licensed person for the general performanc'e of experiments, or that ho should apply totics quotic's for a license for each experim.ent or series of experiments ?—I do not think that it should be toties quoties, but a general per- mission. 119. Subject to revocation if it came to be known that there was an instance of abuse?—No doubt. 120. {I\Ir. Forster.) Have you ever considered this alternative : supposing that there was to be legislation instead of licensing particular persons, giving them power to make experiments, that there should be a strengthening of the jJresent Cruelty to Animals Act, so that the onus probandi should be thrown on a person who was discovered to be making experiments to prove that he was a fit person, and was doing it with a proper object ?—That is a point which I have never considered. 121. You have never considered that alternativ? to actually licensing persons for the experiments ?—No ; indeed Avhat I have said with respect to licensing persons has been only in my mind this very morning since a conversation I have had with Sir Georgo Burrows. Sir T. Watson, Bart., M.D. 5 July 1875. The witness withdrew. Sir Gi'^OEGE Bderows, Bart., M.D., called in and examined. 122. {Chairman.) You are the President of the Royal College of Physicians ?—I have the honour to be so. 123. And late President of the Royal Medical arid Chirurgical Society ?—I was. . ' 124. And late President of the General Medical Council of the United Kingdom ?—I was for five years. 125. Have you had any personal experience of this subject, the trying of experiments upon living animals for scientific purposes ?—I have had limited expe- rience. That experience consisted partly of wit- nessing experiments made by others, and partly in this, that I performed some experiments some years ago myself. 126. Will you state in a tlitle more detail the nature of the experiments ?—My experiments were to elucidate the condition of the brain in different forms of death. There having been a considerable! discussion in the medical profession for many years as to the condition of the bloodvessels of the brain under ditfercnt pathological circumstances, tkese expe- riments were made by destroying animals, either by strangulation, that is by han.giug, or by liajmorrhagc, or by poison, to ascertain what Avas the condition of the bloodvessels of the brain in those different mo.des of dying, with a view to elucidate the pathology of the diff'erent modes of death in human beings ; but the animals all died in the experiment. Death was accom- plished perhaps in a minute or less. 127. {Mr. Forster.) In no case longer than a minute, should you think ?—If a small animal dies by hsemorrhage it'sometimes takes longer. 128. Would you say that it was in no case five minutes ?—No ; certainly it was not. 129. What animals were they?—Sabbits princi- pally ; sheep sometimes. 130. But the-sufi'ering of the animals was not in Sir G. Burrowr,, Bart., M.D. A 3