Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1885-04-02
yIvIsECTI0N.

Nirisection Is again up for public dis
cussion. The humane societies are alto
gether too sensitive upon the subject.
They have recently received a gentle but
firm rebuke from the pen of Professor
Noah K. Davis. One State of the Union
has attempted to legislate against vivisec-
ton, with a view to its absolute prohibi-
ton, but properly enough The effort failed.
| The matter can well be left to the scien-
fists. They are not cruel; no student OF
nature has his sympathies dulled by the
study. The medical practitioner who loves
his profession is the gentlest of men when
inflicting the most pain. His GOODNESS and
apparent want of sympathy are but profess
sional calm and necessary self-possession.
They do not constitute indifference. 1t is
necessary to experiment upon living ami
mails in order to evolve facts of medical
and surgical science 1t is better far to
test medicines and instruments, systems
and theories, upon dumb animals than to
place human life at the risk of doubtful
1
experiment But there is great Zeal of
misapprehension about the pain animals
endure under vivisection. Very often an
aesthetics are administered and the animal
killed before its consciousness is fully re-
stored. 1t will not do for the opponents
of the practice to deny that vivisection has
| L. zr,,I.. /
surgical science, and the means of saving
thousands and thousands of human lives,
and of lessening and preventing incalcu-
liable human suffering. 1t becomes, there
fore, simply a question of comparative
| cruelty Without it mankind must suffer,
and, with the knowledge it has given US,
to have failed to practice it would have
been cruelty to man. As Professor Davis
puts it, if We can arrive at the unit of
physical pain in a brute and measure the
whole scope of its suffering under yivi-
section, we must then weigh it
against the suherings of many human
beings, that, without the intense suffering
Of the brute, must have continued in tor
ture more or less great. Nothing can
Justify cruelty for when what we call
Justification is applicable, the act related
to it is no longer cruel Abstractly, it is
not cruel to infict pain, if it is for a good
purpose and iustifable end The trouble
in all the active debate now going on is
that the NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS. are moved
wholly by their feelings They will not
apply the logic of scientific necessity to the
case. Calmness, with them is unknown
They see only the suffering of the animal
under the knife, and cannot, or will not
look beyond to the end to be attained, nor
backward to ascertain if the inhiction OF
the pain is malicious or willfully harsh and
unsympathetic. Before the stupendou,
advantages of the human race, the right Of
the brute to exemption from inflicted pain
becomes null, says Davis; conclusion
that the cool thinker must reach in exam
inatiOn of both sides of the question But
the suggestion that the experimenter in
vivisection should be licensed by competent
authority is a wise one, and that scientific
bodies are the competent authorities seems
clear. Nivisection should not be secret
but practiced only in full view of faculty
or branch of scientific faculty, and
record Of the practice should be officially
made. We can thus keep it within bounds
and prevent bungling experimenters in
hicting needless pain upon animals. The
practice should also be confined to research
after facts of value to the human race in
healings its ailments, and not permitted to
merely satisfy curiosity, or to amuse classes
! Of medical students