NOTES 507 



have little or no real voice in their affairs. Of course purely private societies may 

 do as they please ; but I think that societies which receive Government funds 

 should often be entirely reconstituted by law. 



The British Science Guild is proceeding in its activities, amongst which I may 

 note the calling of a conference to consider what amendments, if any, should be 

 effected in the Act of Parliament which regulates experiments on animals ; an 

 attempt to abate the disgusting dog nuisance, which results in the universal de- 

 filement of the streets in big cities and towns ; and the formation of a joint com- 

 mittee with the British Medical Association to consider the payment of medical 

 experts by Government and Municipal Departments. The memorandum lately 

 issued by the Guild for the betterment of science in general has been largely 

 accepted by Lord Crewe in his scheme mentioned above. 



Regarding experiments on animals, we all agree that they should be regulated 

 by law provided that similar regulations are enforced in the cases of sport and of 

 the food supply, and also provided that such regulations do not cast unnecessary 

 impediments in the way of genuine research. The present Acts, however, do 

 impede researches not a little, owing to the bad organisation of details. Thus, 

 I hear that the Act is causing considerable mischief as regards the proper diagnosis 

 and treatment of cases in the military hospitals, because it hampers hospital 

 pathologists in using animals in a way which modern medical science suggests and 

 requires. This means that our sons who are fighting for the country are not 

 always being treated with the efficiency that they have a right to expect. Another 

 case of bad working of the Act has recently come to my notice. A worker who 

 had not correctly interpreted the sometimes-obscure wording of the Act and of the 

 printed licence, allowed an animal to recover from a slight experiment, although 

 he did not possess " Certificate B," which is required by the Act. In this he was 

 admittedly wrong ; but what are we to think of the fact that a Government 

 Inspector was present during the whole of the operation and actually saw the 

 animal recovering from the anaesthetic without warning the said worker that this 

 was not allowed ; and then reported him for his error — with the result that the 

 worker was deprived of his licence by the Home Office? I understand that these 

 inspectors are paid by the country for seeing that the Act is properly complied 

 with, and would like to know why this gentlemen took it upon himself to allow 

 the Act to be infringed under his very eyes. It will be interesting to see what 

 the Home Office does in the matter. 



