RESEARCH AND THE DOG.

Press, Volume L, Issue 14987, 6 June 1914, Page 8

RESEARCH AND THE DOG.

A HOUSE'OF COMMONS DEBATE

IMPRESSIVE SPEECH BY DR CHAPPLE.

. (FBOM OUB OWN CORRESPONDENT.) LONDON, April 24. Dr. Chappie, M.P., who, sinco he entered British politics, has made it a serious study, carried off tho honours Jin the second reading debate on tho Dogs Bill. . This measure, brought in | by Sir F. Banbury, proposes to prevent : scientists from using dogs for purposes of vivisection and scientific experiments, though it does not interfcro with the uso of any other animals. , Sir Frederick spoko warmly supporting his measure, and giving pathetic instances of cruelty to dogs. Tho |Homo Offico returns for 1912, he said, showed that 321 dogs and cats were experimented on .without anaesthetics ; 587 wero allowed to recover after serious operations; 5043 was the total number of cutting operations, and thore wero 78,556 inoculations without anaesthetics. Tho Royal Commission in their report unanimously expressed their opinion that tho differentiation in the use of certain animals for experiments was desirable, on account of association or affinity to man, and such animals included tho higher, apes and dogs. For many thousands of years tho dog had been tho best friend that man had ever had. Gentlemen opposite ought to bo under a great debt of gratitude to it, for when tho house of-their Chief • Whip caught fire the alarm was given by his. favourite dog, and but for that he would not be alivo at tho present moment. They had taken tho dog into their lives and altered its nature for their own pleasure and amusement, and were they not men enough to say that, unless it was proved absolutely that experiments useful to man could not be mado without using the dog, it was only right that it should be exempted from this torture? Dr. Chappie, who has previously taken up the cudgels in the cause of medical research, made what the "Mail" describes as "the most powerful speech against the Bill. Ho is a Liberal with a whirlwind style, who poured out a torrential stream of arguments and statements in support of the contention that experiments on dogs have been useful in forwarding medical research." Dr. Chappie said that by experimenting on dogs his profession had been able to differentiate all the causes of jaundice, and to acquiro a knowledgo of tho diseases of the gall bladder and of the methods of relieving sufferers. Sir J. Simpson once tried a : preparation on a dog before trying it himself, and tho dog died. Would anvono say that it would havo been better had he made that fatal experiment on himself? Wero they to deprive investigators of their means of discovery, and were the sick and suffering to lose their chances of relief because the dog was tho friend of man ? No doubt dogs were tho friends of man, but there were dogs and dogs, just as there wero men and men. (Laughter). All that was known about the euro of disease had come from experimentation. Opera:ions as carried on in this country were perfectly painless. The hon. baronet ; was not the friend of dogs, but the •neinv of dogs, and if they had the intelligence of members of this House r.hey would tell him so. (Laughter.) Death by hydrophobia, ono ot" the most cruel deaths he knew, was practicaliy .ibolished to-day by reason of experi- ;• aients on dogs. !

Sir F. Banbury: It has been stopped j iv the muzzling order. i "Dr. Chappie: '"That is the cheap logic jf tho street! Such a statement is enough to make Pasteur turn in his :rave. Hydrophobia was abolished hecause it was discovered by experiments ipon dogs that certain organisms tausod the disease,, and as the result of hose experiments they wero able to ; *ure it, and tho death-rate from the : diseaso had been reduced from 16.5 to .3 per cent." That fact alone would justify all tho vivisection in the world for all time. Not many years ago a certain hospital lost- practically ai! . their cases of acute intestinal obstruc- ; :ion They made up their minds that they would experiment upon dogs, and at once the death-rate went down, and ; in tho first year\th*>y got a large in- [

creaso of recoveries. He was lost in amazement that the hon. baronet, who was so well informed on most other things, enould exhibit on this suJject so much false sympathy, spurious sentimentality, and such absoluto ignorance of the facts, 'it .aount of good done to the canine secies alono by vivisection mado those who weTr opposing the Bill, and not those who were supporting it, tho friends of tho dog. (Cheers.)

Mr Cathcart Wason also took part in the debate Ho was referring to the experiments in regard to cancer as useless, when Sir P. Magnus asked: "How do you know?"

Mr Wason: How do I know this is a hall? How do I know you are sitting there? How do I know anything? I only know from common observation Consumption, syphilis, and cancer wero all amenable to tho treatment they themselves could administer by such means as improved "hygiene, better air. surroundings, and food, and could not be cured by the cutting-up ol their dogs and friends. A ground of complaint against the Insurance Act wa_ that under it for the first timo a very large sura of money was devoted to what was called reserve!. - ,":*.d what the public called vivisection.

The 'Daily Telegraph" describes Dr. Chappie's speech as "exceedingly able from the medical and scientific point of view." .

The "Standard" (Mr .1. Foster Fraser) says: "Dr. Chappie, a Radical scientist, waxed red and hot against tho Bill. He told of lots of people having their legs cut off to prevent gangrene, and how their legs would ,havo been saved had surgical ucience known then what doctors know now. This and countless other merciful things had been found out through vivisection of dogs. He described taking people to pieces and putting them together again without their feeling it—"all through the march of surgical science. Indeed, the easiest and most luxurious way to die —members craned forward to catch the 'tip'—is to die on an operating table."

Tho "Chronicle": "Another remarkable utterance was that of Dr. Chappie who gave the House tho benefit of his experiences as a medical practitioner. Dr. Chappie has never spoken with more force. The wide knowledge, the eloquence, and the fire of his speech made a great impression on the House."

The second reading of the Bill was agreed to by 122 votes to SO.