1/6 



NA TURE 



[June 25, 1908 



Mendel's papers were re-discovered, and his results con- 

 firmed, at tile beginning of this century, by Tschermak, 

 Correns, and de Vries, into believing that de Vries had 

 repeated Mendel's experiments on peas; and I rashly 

 assailed Mr. Punnett for not making any reference to 

 papers which 1 had not read. Mr. Punnett was therefore 

 entirely in the right, and I was in the wrong. 



Mr. Lock has also pointed out to me that an experiment, 

 almost identical with the kind of crucial one which I said 

 ought to be performed, has already been done. I am 

 familiar with the experiment to which Mr. Lock refers 

 (one of his own with maize), and though I regard it as 

 very strong evidence in favour of the Mendelian interpreta- 

 tion of hereditary phenomena, I am sure that Mr. Lock 

 will agree with me that an experiment the results of which 

 will be obtained in September, igoq, is an even more 

 crucial one. A. D. Darbishire. 



THE RESEARCH DEFENCE SOCIETY. 

 'T'HERE is evidence of a growing; feeling among 



•'■ members of the medical profession that the 

 time has come to disperse the atmosphere of m3'stery 

 which has hitherto attended their ministrations, and 

 to take the public more into their confidence as to the 

 principles on which health may be preserved or re- 

 gained. They have every reason to believe that the 

 |)opular ignorance of medical science not only hinders 

 the progress of hygiene and therapeutics, but also is 

 the soil on which quackeries of all kinds grow and 

 flourish, and that the education of the laity in the 

 elementary principles of medicine would conduce to 

 the public health, and at the same time benefit the 

 physician by freeing him from the competition of 

 the incompetent and unscrupulous. 



One of the noisiest sections of the opponents of 

 ''.cientific progress is formed by the numerous small 

 •ocieties the object of which is stated to be the further 

 limitation or the complete prohibition of experiments 

 nn animals. It might seem that the evidence given 

 before the Royal Commission on Vivisection would 

 -uffice to demonstrate the benefits accruing to 

 liumanity from the use of this experimental method 

 in the past, as well as to indicate that its prohibition 

 would relegate medicine to the slow advance it made 

 in the Middle Ages. But it is felt that only a small 

 fraction of the public has the courage to seek know- 

 ledge in a Blue-book, and that' to reach the multitude 

 informntion must be conveyed in a less unprepossess- 

 ing guise. 



With this object in view, the Research Defence 

 Society has been formed, with I^ord Cromer as presi- 

 dent, " to make known the facts ns to experiments on 

 animals in this country, the immense importance to 

 the welfare of mankind of such experiments, and the 

 great saving of human life and health directlv at- 

 rt-ibutable to them." In his letter to the Press an- 

 nouncing the formation of the society. Lord Cromer 

 directs attention to the evidence given before the Royal 

 Commission that " these experiments are conducted 

 with proper care, and that the small amount of pain 

 or discomfort inflicted is insignificant compared with 

 the great gain to knowledge," and states that the 

 society will " endeavour to make it clear that medical 

 and other scientific men who eniplov these methods 

 are not less humane than the rest of their countrvmen, 

 who dailv. though perhaps unconsciously, profit by 

 them." With this object the society proposes to pub- 

 lish articles, to give information to all inquirers, and 

 assist all who desire to examine the arguments on 

 behalf of experiments on animals. 



The founders of the society ought to be gratified 

 by the success which has alre.-idy attended their efforts, 

 for it numbers more than 1200 members, of whom 100 are 

 ladies, and this membership has been drawn from all 



NO. 2017, VOL. 78] 



departments of public life, and includes representatives 

 of every class, including many who have taken an 

 active part in the prevention of cruelly to animals. 

 The medical profession is naturally largely repre- 

 sented, but the great number of members who appear 

 to have no direct connection with either medicine or 

 science indicates that there is a wide-felt impression 

 that the methods adopted by the opponents of vivi- 

 section are objectionable, and that they have failed 

 to justify their criticisms of this method of investiga- 

 tion. 



The society has lost no time in opening its crusade, 

 for we have already received two pamphlets published 

 under its auspices. The first of these comprises " The 

 Evidence of Lord Justice Fletcher Moulton before the 

 Royal Commission on Vivisection " (Macmillan and Co., 

 Ltd.), and the society is to be congratulated on having 

 had this extremely valuable presentation of the prin- 

 ciples of the question available as an introduction to ' 

 its promised series. For, while the other witnesses on 

 the scientific side were by the nature of things com- 

 pelled to limit their evidence to a detailed account of 

 the methods adopted in their special branches and the 

 results accruing from them. Lord Justice Fletcher 

 Moulton was able to take a wider view, and pointed 

 out with indisputable logic that the experimental 

 inethod olTers the only way to advance in medical as 

 in other scientific subjects. Far from questioning the 

 justification of using animals for experimental pur- 

 poses, he holds that it is actually immoral to test any 

 method of treatment in man until it has been ascer- 

 tained as far as possible by investigations on animals 

 that it may be used without injury. .\s for the sug- 

 gestion that investigators should experiment upon 

 themselves, he considers that this is to be deprecated 

 except after full investigation by means of animal 

 experiments, not only on account of the danger to the 

 individual subject of the experiment, but because such 

 a procedure tends to lessen the feeling of the sanctity 

 of "human life. 



The great value of Lord Justice Fletcher Moulton 's 

 evidence has been recognised by all who are interested 

 in the subject. He was the only layman who ap- 

 peared before the C^ommission in defence of scientific 

 method, and he has presented his views with a cogency 

 which must convince anyone who is capable of follow- 

 ing a simple line of argument, and has not aban- 

 doned common sense and ordinary logic. 



The second pamphlet is by Colonel David Bruce, and 

 is entitled " The Extinction of Malta Fever (a Lesson 

 in the LTse of Animal Experiment) " (Macmill.in and 

 Co., Ltd.). It forms an .-idmirable complement to the 

 first, for while Lord Justice Fletcher Moulton is largely 

 .concerned with the ethical considerations involved in 

 vivisection and the general principles of scientific in- 

 vestigation. Colonel Bruce gives a concise account of 

 one case in which these principles were applied with 

 remarkable and indisputable benefit. Malta fever 

 formerly accounted for about 75,000 days of illness each 

 year in the garrison at Malta, and hundreds of officers 

 and soldiers had to be invalided to England as the 

 result of its ravages. The old statistical methods had 

 been applied for many years, but had failed to give 

 anv clue to the cause of the fever, and no improvement 

 resulted from improved sanitation. Finally, the 

 Government induced the Royal .Society to send out a 

 commission under Colonel Bruce to investigate the 

 subject, and they soon satisfied themselves by experi- 

 ments on animals that the cause of the fever is a 

 micrococcus which gains entrance to the human body 

 bv means of the goat's milk, which is largelv consumed 

 in the island. About half the goats in Malta har- 

 boured the microbe, and 10 per cent, of them secreted 

 it in their milk. Measures were at once taken to pre- 



