o should satisfy himself that the
animal is throughout the whole experiment and UNTIL ITS DEATH IN A
STATE OF COMPLETE ANAESTHESIA."

This is a most remarkable recommendation. Can it imply anything else
than distrust of the experimenter?

THIRD. "STRICTER PROVISIONS REGARDING THE PRACTICE OF PITHING." The
operation must be complete; performed only under an adequate
anaesthetic; and by a licensed person when made on a warm-blooded
animal.

FOURTH. "ADDITIONAL RESTRICTIONS REGULATING THE PAINLESS DESTRUCTION
OF ANIMALS which show signs of suffering after the experiment."

To this recommendation and its suggested amendment by three of the
Commissioners, reference has already been made.

FIFTH. "A CHANGE IN THE METHOD OF SELECTING and in the constitution of
the Advisory body to the Secretary of State."

SIXTH. "SPECIAL RECORDS BY EXPERIMENTERS IN CERTAIN CASES." On this
point we have seen that three of the Commissioners went yet farther,
and believed that in ALL cases of painful experiment--and, possibly,
in all cases whatsoever, such reports should be made.

It is now upwards of thirty-five years since the Act regulating the
practice of vivisection in England came into effect. During all that
period, in the United States, the law has never ceased to be an object
of misrepresentation and attack. Before Legislatures and Senate
Committees, on the platform and in the press, by men of good
reputation but associated with laboratory interests, the English law
has been denounced as a hindrance to scientific progress and a warning
against similar legislation in the United States. And yet nothing can
be more evident that all these attacks were based upon ignorance and
misstatement. We find a Royal Commission in England, composed almost
entirely of scientific men, everyone of them favourable to animal
experimentation, devoting years to an inquiry concerning not
vivisection only, but the working of the law by which it is
regulated. And the conclusions reached are in every respect opposed
to the statements made by the laboratory interests here. THEY FULLY
ENDORSE THE PRINCIPLE OF STATE REGULATION, WHICH EVERYWHERE IN AMERICA
IS SO STRENUOUSLY OPPOSED. But this is not all. Every recommendation
made for modification of the Act is in the direction of animal
protection, and toward an increased stringency of the regulations
relating to animal experimentation. In not a single instance was
there recommendation that the regu