Appendix to First report of the Commissioners : minutes of evidence, October to December, 1906.

  • Great Britain. Royal Commission on Vivisection.
Date:
1907
Catalogue details

Licence: In copyright

Credit: Appendix to First report of the Commissioners : minutes of evidence, October to December, 1906. 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.

    14/168 (page 4)
    Mr W P sionally a case would be laid before him on the ground Byrne, c.b! °f the probability of considerable pain. 31 OctT 1906. 5. Then there is a power given by Section 8 to annex conditions to a licence. Is that frequently exercised 1— Regularly. 6. Then you say that one condition in universal use requires that no operative procedure more severe than simple inoculation or superficial venesection may be adopted without anaesthetics?—That is the standing practice of the Department. I should explain, per- haps, that it is not necessary invariably to insert a con- dition in the licence to that effect, because, of course, the terms of the application may show that no pro- cedure more severe than those is contemplated, and in that case the condition, of course, would not be inserted. 7. You mean by that that if it is a case of simple inoculation or superficial venesection you do not re- quire anaesthetics. You say if it is more severe than that it cannot be adopted without anaesthetics?—Yes, that is universally true. 8. That does not exactly include the proposition which I suppose you mean to include, that if it is a case of simple inoculation or superficial vene- section you do not require anaesthetics ?—As a rule, no, but it is not the Home Office that excludes the use of anaesthetics ; it is the learned Authority that signs the certificate that excludes them. 9. But as regards simple inoculation, anaesthetics, in point of fact, in practice are not required ?—That is so. 10. Then there is a condition that an animal inoculated without anaesthetics shall be painlessly killed immediately the main result of the experiment has been attained if it is found to be in pain which is either considerable in degree or likely to endure. How is that worked ?—That is a condition which does not come in the Act itself. It was devised by the Secretary of State for the purpose of securing that no animal which was made to suffer illness and possibly pain— certainly inconvenience, as the result of inoculation— should be kept alive a moment longer than was abso- lutely necessary for the investigation. 11. But that is a condition which is enforced in prac- tice?—Yes. 12. Then as to the condition you speak of in the next paragraph, that all animals operated on under ansesthetics which are to be kept alive after recovery of consciousness shall be treated with strict antiseptic precautions, and that if these fail and pain results the animal shall be killed immediately, is that another of the practical conditions that are enforced?—Yes, that is also a condition which does not occur in the Act. The Act merely provides that if you want to perform an operation on an animal and keep it alive afterwards you must do the initial operation under ansesthetics. This condition goes a step further, and says you must not only perform the operation under ansesthetics, but with strict antiseptic precautions, as it would be done on a human being. That is in order to minimise the likelihood of pain. 13. Under what Section of the Act are these condi- tions imposed ?—They are conditions devised by the Secretary of State under the general power given to him by Section 8. 14. And they are printed regulations?—They are attached to the licence granted to each indi- vidual in type-written form. They are sometimes type- written and sometimes printed, but they are attached conspicuously to his licence. 15. Then you say that any subsequent operative pro- cedures on such animals must, under another condition, be carried out under ansesthetics of sufficient power to preclude pain. All these are conditions made under Section 8, I understand?—Yes, they come in addition to the strict requirements of the Act; they are all further precautions devised by the Secretary of State. 16. Then care is taken to secure that no licence or certificate is allowed unless it bears the requisite signa- tures of the scientific authorities enumerated in Sec- tion 11. That is necessary, is it not ?—That is neces- sary. 17. All you mean is that the Act is carefully enforced ?—Yes. 18. The scientific status of every applicant, you say. is carefully considered before he is entrusted with a licence. That is as regards licence. That does not refer to certificates but to licences ?—The status of the intending investigator would be considered by the Home Office, whether it was an application for a licence only or for a licence with certificates. In every case it is considered, and authority would not be granted to a person deemed unqualified. 19. Have you had any complaints made to you that improper persons are licensed?—Yes, complaints have been received. There is a good deal of miscellaneous correspondence, of course, on the subject of vivisection. 20. Has that been on account of some experiment which has been made. Are they complaints by medical bodies that the individual is a person who ought not to have been authorised, or are these complaints in the interests of the animals ?—They are complaints in the interests of the animals. Within my recollection there never has been a complaint from a scientific body. 21. You say there have been complaints ; have they been frequent, or occasional?—Complaints of a vague character have been fairly frequent. For instance, as the Commission knows, there are one or two gentlemen who have carried out, I daresay, important investi- gations, whose names have been very unpopular with the Anti-Vivisectionist bodies. These bodies have re- presented that these gentlemen ought not to have had certificates and licences. 22. But are these complaints on the ground of want of skill on their part?—No, we have never had any such complaint. 23. They have been rather objections that they are not people who ought to be trusted with licences because they perform operations which are considered cruel?—-Yes, or have expressed themselves in a way that these societies do not approve of. 24. Then you say that every application for a new licence or certificate is referred by the Secretary of State to the Association for the Advancement of Medi- cine by Research for their advice. Has the Home Office anything to do with the question of whether a certificate ought to have been granted or not?—Yes, because the Home Secretary has the power to disallow or suspend every certificate. 25. Although recommended by the statutory recom- menders ?—Although submitted and signed by the statutory authorities. But I may point out that cer- tificates are not recommended by the societies as licences are. It is a very important difference between licences and certificates that a licence is re- commended by the learned Authority mentioned in Section 11. A certificate is not; it is granted by them, and a certificate is the mere statement of fact. 26. That is what I meant. They grant the certifi- cate ?—They grant the certificate, and the Secretary of State may pass it or disallow it if he chooses; conse- quently he has the same responsibility as in the case of licences. 27. The Association for the Advancement of Medi- cine by Research is a body consisting of a great number of eminent surgeons, I suppose?—Yes, I believe it includes, nominally, at any rate, a large number of gentlemen of great distinction in this matter of investigation ; but no doubt the Commission will ascertain its precise composition from the body itself. 28. But the Home Office, at any rate, treats them as Home Office advisers on these points?—Yes. 29. In all cases?—In all cases. 30. Then you give what I need not repeat, because all this will be in print, some history of that Associa- tion ?—Yes.* 31. And it was Sir William Harcourt who initiated that practice of consulting them ?—Yes. 32. Then, when further applications are granted, I understand the Inspectors are consulted also?—Yes, Mr. Thane, the Inspector in all cases, and Sir James Russell in the cases which arise in the district with which he deals. 33. Is Dr. Thane the Inspector for the whole of Great Britain?—Yes, he is the Inspector, and Sir See note at the eni of witness’s evidence.