AN APPEAL FOR THE TOTAL ABOLITION OF VIVISECTION.
[TO THE EDITOR OF THE "SPECTATOR.")
BIR,—It would be difficult to overstate the strength of the feel- ing which exists against Vivisection. The truth is that the fact of its existence, as well as the extent of it, is to most of us a -discovery, and a discovery so painful that it is not too much to say it has brought a distinct weight of sorrow into many lives, a sorrow which is kept alive and deepened almost daily by the ,publication of fresh facts and fuller consideration of their tendency.
The apologists for vivisection insist much on the difference between British and foreign vivisection. This difference is rapidly disappearing. It is well known that foreign methods of physiological inquiry are being followed, and in many cues are being adopted in their most terrible forms. No doubt there are differences between vivisectors, but vivisection must be judged -and treated as a whole ; as "a fortress is no stronger than its weakest point," so vivisection is no better than its worst features.
Nothing can be more untrue than the statements that those who seek the abolition of vivisection are indifferent to other forms of cruelty. They feel that this great atrocity stands in the fore- -front of all cruelty, dignified as it is with the name of "Science." It is impossible to teach the ignorant, and make them feel how wrong it is to treat animals with cruelty in the common use of -them in labour, when the physiologists are allowed to do far worse things with impunity. The moral obligation of humanity must be recognised by those at the top of society, or it never will -extend to the bottom. It is a marvellous thing that men other- wise reasonable should say, as the Doctors do, that there is such a large amount of cruelty in the way of sport, oppression of beasts of burden, and general barbarity, that it is a frivolous thing to make efforts to put down vivisection. If vivisection were not, -as I believe it to be, the most horrible of all forms of cruelty, is the general extent of an evil a reason for leaving it alone, is it not rather our duty in the highest degree to do all we can against it because it does greatly prevail, and that in every form and every instance in which we can reach it? Apart from the simple, primary evil of vivisection, viz., the designed, deliberate, and -studied agony inflicted on innocent creatures which we are under high obligation to protect, its moral consequences to those who practise and teach it are most wretched. What, in fact, can be so harmful to those whose duty it is to give great pain, with the purpose of doing good to the sufferer and in sympathy with the individual, to inflict great pain on wretched, helpless animals, for purposes which wholly exclude all possible sympathy with the sufferers ?
So much has lately been said by doctors, or rather by physio- logists who profess to represent them, as to the very small extent
to which vivisection is practised, and the small amount of pain inflicted by it, that it seems they assume that total ignorance pre- vails respecting the disclosures given in evidence before the Royal Commission. For the large number of victims, and the dreadful nature of many British experiments, I refer to the evidence of Dr. Rutherford. (pp. 152-3-4). This is far too lengthy to quote ; I just call attention to the fact of the thirty-six dogs under torture for about eight hours each ; moreover, I will quote a small part of p. 204, as showing what an extreme case a foreign experiment (from M. Paul Bert's narrative) really is ; I would, however caution a reader who cannot bear heart-rending details of heart-sickening horror :—" In this experi- ment, a middle-sized, vigorous dog was first rendered helpless (by curare), 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 sensitive- ness, and its will remained intact, a condition accompanied by the most atrocious sufferings that the imagination of man can conceive. In this condition, 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 dis- sected out, in order to lay bare the various 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." Can any one, after this, consent to the toleration of vivisection, or any compromise with it ?—I am, Sir, &c.,
Previous page
