HUMANE TREATMENT OF ANIMALS USED IN RESEARCH 55 
same thing in many other circumstances and, indeed, we have an 
obligation to do so in this case. 
Now, what are the conditions that I propose, in this bill, to attach 
to gifts of public money ? They are, really, few and simple. Shorn 
of the verbiage that is unavoidable in the framing of a law of this 
kind, this is the essence of H.R. 3556 : 
(1) It would establish an Agency for Laboratory Animal Control, 
under a Commissioner. I have not specified the exact location of this 
Agency in my bill, thinking that this is a minor matter for determi- 
nation by the Congress or by the executive branch, but my own opin- 
ion is that the Agency should be a unit of the Department of Justice. 
(2) It would lay down certain definitions of humane care and 
treatment of animals, all practical. The definitions of humane treat- 
ment in my bill are, in fact, almost identical with standards prescribed 
by our leading scientific organizations in this country. 
(3) It would require agencies and instrumentalities of the United 
States that use animals in research and allied pursuits to live up to the 
prescribed humane standards. 
(4) The bill would forbid agencies of the Government to grant 
Federal funds to individuals and institutions that do not live up to 
the prescribed humane standards. 
(5) It would authorize and require the Commisioner of the Agency 
for Laboratory Animal Control to enforce the act. 
And that, in brief, is the whole substance of H.R. 3556. Other lan- 
guage of the bill is concerned merely with the machinery of ordering 
and enforcing those substantive points. 
I expect that it will be argued today, because I already have heard 
and considered such arguments, that it would be impractical and bur- 
densome to require, as H.R. 3556 would, that scientists and labora- 
tories submit research project plans to the Commissioner of Labora- 
tory Animal Control before receiving grants of Federal funds, or to 
make reports later of the details of how the Federal money was used. 
I think that this is an argument without merit. Moreover, I think 
that this is a really scandalous contention. 
It seems to be implied, by those who so argue, that the Federal Gov- 
ernment and the American people have no right to know, before a grant 
of taxpayers’ money is made, what is to be done with the enemy. And 
it seems to be implied that the Government and the people have no 
right to know, when the money has been spent, how it actually was 
used. That is an arrogant position, indefensible. I think that we 
need a lot more control than we have had over use of the vast sums of 
money that we are every year giving to the laboratories and the re- 
searchers, and I think it is high time that we do this job. Indeed, it is 
exactly here that, I think, H.R. 3556 would begin to operate to save 
money and to improve medical research. 
Mr. Chairman, I recall to you that this year the House of Representa- 
tives has voted to allow the National Institutes of Health to spend and 
to give away $840,800,000 for medical research. We have, in addition, 
authorized other departments of Government to spend many more mil- 
lion of dollars — well over a billion dollars in total — for the same 
purpose. 
In this connection it is interesting to note that the American Medical 
Association says that it is “probable” that we are spending “huge sums 
