Appendix to Fifth report of the Commissioners : minutes of evidence, March 1908, with appendices and index.

Great Britain. Royal Commission on Vivisection (1906)

Date:: 1908

Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Appendix to Fifth report of the Commissioners : minutes of evidence, March 1908, with appendices and index. Source: Wellcome Collection.

6/164 (page 2)

E. Lawrie, M.B., I.M S. 25 Mar. 1908. 2 MINUTES OF 20990. Did he say that they had had none at all—no ansesthetic at all?—He said that they had had nothing but the morphin solution. 20991. Did he say how much morphin he had had? —He said ten drops of morphin solution. ° 20992. Would that in your opinion have produced anesthesia ?—No anesthesia at all. 20993. Would three grains of morphin produce anesthesia ?—No, three grains does not anzsthetise a dog. 20994. Have you experimented on dogs yourself ?— Yes, I have. 20995. With aneesthetics?—With anesthetics and 20996. And that is the result of your experiments ?— That is the result of the experiments of the Hyderabad Commission on 600 animals. 20997. You mean as to how much anesthetic should be given ?—They were principally as regards the effect of chloroform; and the effects of certain other anes- thetics were inquired into incidentally. 20998. What I asked you was, have you experimented with morphin on dogs ?—Yes, we have. 20999. You did ?—Yes, repeatedly. 21000. Did Dr. Gaskell say anything as to why they had not had anssthetics ?—He said they were going to experiment with the chloroform afterwards, and that they did not give them any chloroform before the ex- periment began because they wanted to have the primary effects of the chloroform in the experiment. 21001. And that was the reason they used morphin? —He did not say that was the reason they had used morphin. He led me to suppose that they used morphin simply to comply with the Act, and to be able to say that they had used an anesthetic. _ 21002. Can you remember Dr. Gaskell’s words ?— No, I cannot remember the words; but that is their exact meaning. 21003. You have sent me in a statement here that uses certain language. You do not say now that Dy. Gaskell said it was done to hoodwink the Inspector. Did he use any such words?—He used words that had that precise meaning. 21004. Did he use any such words ?—I cannot remem- ber the exact words, but that is the precise meaning of what he said to me. 21005. You must see that it is material to try and remember it. You have printed this document and circulated it among us with the word ‘“ hoodwink ” ?— That is the precise meaning of what he said to me. 21006. I think you must really know enough about’ evidence to understand why we want to know the exact words that Dr. Gaskell used ?—I cannot remember the precise words that he used. - 21007. Then you will not undertake to say that he did use the words “ hoodwink the Inspector ” ?—No, I will not undertake to say he did use those words; but what he said had that precise meaning. 21008. It is rather odd that you should have circu- lated that if you are not sure that he said it, “and satisfy the Act”; he did say that apparently ?—Those were the precise words he used so far as I recollect; but the meaning he gave me was that he meant to evade the Act. That was the impression he gave me. 21009. To satisfy the Act?—Yes. 21010. That was the first account you gave me just now when I asked you the question, that what he said was that it was to satisfy the Act ?—Hxactly. 21011. He would not have satisfied the Act without producing anesthesia, would he?—What I understood was that if he was able to say that he had used an anesthetic (and he called morphin, I suppose, an pose are for that purpose) that would satisfy the EET. 21012. That is an inference you can draw from what lie said ?—That is what I understood from what he said, 21013. Did Dr. Shore say anything?—I do not re- member his saying anything. 21014. Who was present at the time that these words were said ?—There was no one present but myself 21015. I suppose Dr. Gaskell was present ?—Of _ 21016. Who else was present ?—I do not think any- hody else was present besides Dr. Gaskell. EVIDENCE: 21017. Are you sure that nobody else was present ?— J do not think anybody was. : 21018. Did you then go in to luncheon?—Yes, we went in to lunchéon then. 21019. Were these’ words said in the laboratory ?— They were said in the laboratory. 21020. Then you went in to luncheon ?—Yes. 21021. How long were you there ?—I cannot tell you. We were there 20 minutes or half an hour. 21022. And you. came. back into the laboratory 1 Yes, and then the experiment was done. _ | 21023. Was chloroform used then ?—Chloroform was used for the experiment. 21024. Was chloroform used in such a quantity as to produce anesthesia ?—Well, it killed the animal. 21025. (Mr. Tomkinson.) Was it given to both dogs? —WNo, it was given to one. 21026. (Chairman.) Was ansesthesia produced — Apart from that there was no anesthesia. It was given until the animal died, for the purpose of testing 21027. I should have thought it was a simple question to answer. Were the animals anesthetised when you ~ came back from luncheon ?—No, they were not. 21028. Were they operated on, or only watched ?— Nothing was done except the administration of chloro- . form for the purpose of testing its action in the exper1- ment, that is all. Mad ’ 21029. Did the dogs make any sign or sound ?—They only appeared to be in pain. 21030. How did they show that?—By shivering. 21031. But they made no-sound ?—They had tubes in | their throats. 7 21032. That would prevent it?—That would prevent it. Still, dogs do not always make sounds when they 21033. I do not say that they did. I only wanted to know whether the dogs did. Was anything said as to the time the dogs had been under operation ?—I was told that they had been under operation for four or five- hours. : 21034. By whom ?—By Dr. Gaskell. — ; 21035. It was before luncheon that you were told that ?—Yes. , 21036. (Sir Mackenzie Chalmers.) What time of the day would it be when you were told that?—It was between one and two o'clock in the day. ° 21037. (Chairman.) I think that is all I want to ask you. ; 21038. (Sir William Collins.) You have seen the evi- dence given by Dr. Shore as to the strength of the solution of morphia that was used ?—Yes. | 21039. Are you prepared to accept that statement ? —Well, no, I am not; I prefer to believe what Dr. Gaskell told me at the time. 21040. But at the time had you reason to believe that the solution of morphia was of the pharmacoposial — strength or not?—I understand it was the pharma- copeeial strength ; because when a medical man tells — you that solution of morphia is used you understand that. 21041. I see Dr. Shore stated in answer to Question 19458: “Of the two dogs, one dog received ten cubic centimetres of a 2 per cent. solution of hydrochloride of morphia, and the other dog six cubic centimetres of the same solution.” You think that is not correct?— — If that is correct, then of course what Dr. Gaskell told — me misled me; it may be from the way I took it. 21042. If what Dr. Shore says is correct, would the — dogs then have been in a condition free from pain?— © No, certainly not. 7 ; 21043. Do you say that a dose of 3 grains of morphia — will not render a dog anesthetised ?—No, I do not ; think it would have any anssthetising effect. 21044. Did you see the bottle out of which the mor- | phia that was used was taken?—No, I did not.. 21045. (Sir John McFadyean.) Did you make any notes of the facts that you have just been telling the © Commission at the time?—No, I did not. I. did of — the second experiment. 1 was responsible for the experiment was guilty not only of breaking the Act, but of absolute brutality 1-I -_—