The ethics of vivisection.

  • Carpenter, William Benjamin, 1813-1885.
Date:
[1882?]
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: The ethics of vivisection. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by The Royal College of Surgeons of England. The original may be consulted at The Royal College of Surgeons of England.

    10/12 (page 246)
    My argument, then, is, that if in all the foregoing cases the Moral consciousness of those who consider themselves most elevated! in the scale of humanity justifies the infliction of animal suffering for what is obviously a real benefit to Man, even though the continu- ance of such benefit involves the constant renewal of the suffering, much more is a temporary and limited infliction justifiable, for the discovery of such scientific truths as have a clear prospective bearing on human well-being, moral as well as physical; since every such discovery, once established, is a boon for ever, not only in its direct applications, but in serving as a stepping-stone to further discoveries, which may prove of still more priceless benefit. If the prospect of such amelioration which opens out before the view of the Experimental Physiologist is not a high and noble motive, I do not know where such a motive is to be found. But that antici- pation must be assured by the most careful and prolonged study of the subject on his own part, and should be confirmed by the approval of others of equal or superior competence, before he can be justified in entering upon a course of experimentation involving severe and prolonged suffering to the subjects of it. In the course of his investigation he should never forget the pain he is inflicting, or lose sight of any means he can devise for its avoidance or mitigation. But when all this is honestly begun and sedulously carried out, I .can from the bottom of my heart wish him “ Grod speed; ” in the full conviction that his work is good and right, and will be approved as “ merciful” in the highest sense, by that Divine Father who desires from us the obedience of the spirit, not that of the letter. Let it not be said that I have been here drawing an ideal picture. The “ antiseptic surgery ” which constitutes by far the greatest single improvement ever introduced into Surgical practice, is the result of a long course of experiments planned and carried out on the basis afforded by Pasteur’s admirable researches upon disease-germs, by a man reared amidst a religious community distinguished above all others for its far-seeing humanity, trained in biological science under the ablest teachers, approved by his previous labours as a profound and philosophic physiologist, and a master of the science and art of surgery. I hold up this research as a model for the imitation of Physiologists, whether medical or scientific ; and should be surprised indeed if any Anti-Vivisectionist who had the misfortune to sustain a compound fracture of both legs in a railway-collision (as once happened to a valued friend of my own) should refuse to avail himself—or herself—of its beneficent results; or if, having- made a rapid and comparatively painless recovery under the anti- septic treatment, instead of (as happened in that case) having to go through months of protracted suffering, with long-continued appre- hension that the sacrifice of one or both limbs might be necessary to preserve life, he should regard the work of Joseph Jackson Lister with any other feelings than those of the most grateful approval. William B. Carpenter.