e had performed PAINFUL experiments upon
animals both in Germany and in this country." The Commission
unanimously condemned his position as "untenable, and in our opinion,
ABSOLUTELY REPREHENSIBLE." Would the author of "Animal
Experimentation" regard this protest against certain experiments made
by the men named in that paragraph, as a "calumny"?

The unfairness of giving out to the world merely two sentences as
representative of the conclusions of an important Commission will
become evident to anyone who reads other of the unanimous conclusions
of this report. Take the following: "WE STRONGLY HOLD THAT LIMITS
SHOULD BE PLACED TO ANIMAL SUFFERING in the search for physiological
or pathological knowledge, though some have contended that such
considerations should be wholly subordinated to the claims of
scientific research, or the pursuit of some material good for man."[1]
Does this conclusion bear out the contention that animal suffering in
the laboratory is a MYTH? Or take the recommendations of the
Commission concerning CURARE, a drug which is used in every
laboratory, but which, curiously enough, finds no mention in the index
of Dr. Keen's book. The Report says: "Some of us are of the opinion
that the use of CURARE should be altogether prohibited; but we are all
agreed that if its use is to be permitted at all, an Inspector or some
person nominated by the Secretary of State should be present from the
commencement of the experiment, who should satisfy himself that the
animal is, THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE EXPERIMENT AND UNTIL ITS DEATH, IN A
STATE OF COMPLETE ANAESTHESIA."[2] Why was this recommendation made,
if the use of CURARE is never associated with painful experimentation?
Or read yet further: "We are of the opinion that ADDITIONAL SAFEGUARDS
AGAINST PAIN MIGHT BE PROVIDED, without interfering with legitimate
research." These recommendations are incorporated in the final report
of the Commissioners, not one of whom was an Antivivisectionist. Why
were they not quoted by Dr. Keen.

[1] Report, p. 57, par. 96.
[2] Ibid., p. 61, par. 114.

The Report of the Royal Commission on Vivisection, together with the
evidence produced before it, constitutes the most important document
relating to the subject which has appeared in a quarter of a century.
It is greatly to be regretted that the author of "Animal
Experimentation" should have given his readers no idea whatsoever of
this report, except a warning of two sentences, t