The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1899-01-02
ABOUT VIVlSECTION.


can Society for the Prevention Of Cruelty
Q Animals graphically showed his position
90 the question OF V,visection by pointing
o some volumes Of protest which he had
built up against the practice lie has pun
himself in communication with leading
clergy men and physicians of Europe and
America. and he has reached the cOncru-
sion therefrOm that the medical profession
af least, is divided against Itself on the
question of vivlsoction. Therefore ne
thinks his division sufficient argument
in favor Of restricting the practice. lie is
naturally opposed 10 vivisection himself
lie said.
There is nothing new to be said about
this thing. unless some development takes
place We can but reiterate our arguments
over and over again until the government
takes the matter 20 hand. 1t viii do that
soon, for there is now a bill before Con-
sress which viii pui an end TO the bar
aarous features of Vivisecton. This bin
already has passed the lower house and
the senate win get it presently. Then,
doubtless, we shall be able to reach all
those who disobey the letter of the law
Meantime there is no doubt that the ma
jority of humane minded persons, even in
Guiding the medical profession, are against
VlNlsecton. The best proof 1 can give you
Of this is to show you some testimonials
have received from eminent doctors and
scientists all over the world. Here is one
from Prof. Lawson TAFT, the celebrated
Enghsh scientist. He writes me:
Prof. TAFT Against the Practice.
Like every member of my profession.
l was brought up in the belief that by
vivisecuon had been obtained almost every
important fact an physiology. and that
many of our most valued means Of saving
life and diminishing suffering had result
ed from experiments on the Tower animals
l now know that nothing of the sort is
true concerning the art of surgery, and
not only do / not believe thai vivisection
has helped the surgeon one bit, but know
that ii has often Ted him astray. In the
interests of true science its employment
should be stopped
mat IS rather convincing, is it not?
Wen here is another, which was written
by Sir William Ferguson. late surgeon TO
the Queen of England. He said:
am not aware of these experiments
on the lower animals having led to the
mitigation of pain or to Improvement as
regards surgical details
Here is another opinion which is more
specific. DR.. Charles Bell Taylor. fellow
OF the Royal College Of Surgeons, gave
four reasons against vivisection. He says
The practice of cutting open living
animals. literally the practice of dissect-
ing them alive. in the supposed interests
of science, which is called vivisection, is,
In my judgment to be condemned.
'First-Becau5e there is really no ne
cessity for it.
Second-Because it has been proved to
be not only useless, but misleading.
'Third-Because il takes the place of
other methods of study and observation
which are infinitely preferable and to
which no one can possibly object and
'Fourth-Because it is a gross and
cruel abuse of the power which God has
given us over the lower animals and
virtually a surrender of our chief claim
TO mercy for ourselves
There are here many more, all trend
ing the same way and from men quite as
capable of judging as those who are in
favor of the practice. Therefore, our
stand is quite tenable even in the eyes
of scientists, and our arguments against
the practice are not based merely on the
feelings of unscientific enthusiasts, but on
the knowledge that the very confreres of
the vivisectionists fully agree with US"