HUMANE TREATMENT OF ANIMALS USED IN RESEARCH 105 
I have held a license and certificates under the Cruelty to Animals 
Act for 24 years, first when at the Lister Institute of Preventive Medi- 
cine in London, then at the Universities of Cambridge and Wales, 
and currently at the Huntingdon Research Center. At the University 
of Wales I was head of a university department concerned primarily 
with research and my present post likewise involves responsibility for 
direction of research workers of different disciplines. Since 1945 I 
have therefore had to assume responsibility to the Home Office for 
licensed premises as well as for an individual license. 
Throughout this period I have found the authorities to be construc- 
tive and helpful and at no time has any reasonable request been re- 
fused. The premises have been subject to inspection and licenses and 
their accompanying certificates have been obtained for a variety of 
persons engaged in research, ranging from medical graduates to 
animal technicians. I have found that an application to hold a license 
is subject to careful scrutiny, often including a detailed telephone 
inquiry from the Home Office, but never to unreasonable refusal. The 
head of the department or laboratory is expected to use his discretion 
in this as in other ways, and to insure the adequacy of his premises 
and working conditions, including animal quarters. 
In my experience the visits from the Home Office inspector, who is 
medically qualified, provide the opportunity for a useful exchange of 
information. There appears to be considerable misunderstanding of 
the way in which British research workers have been able to complete 
their applications under the Cruelty to Animals Act. The applica- 
tion made by the individual research worker in the United Kingdom 
does not in practice limit a responsible experimental approach, at 
least in the experience of my colleagues and myself. Provided that 
he observes the humane standards of experimentation required, he 
may modify his protocol and the numbers of animals involved to suit 
the research program. 
Only if exceptional pain is anticipated is it required to furnish 
precise details in advance. The Home Secretary has, of course, wide 
powers, but in practice the research worker and the head of the or- 
ganization in which he is working are expected to conform to the 
general requirements of the act and are left unmolested. The records 
that have been returned are but a fragment of those that any trained 
research worker wall keep anyway. The so-called redtape associated 
with the application and records is very slight indeed, and does not 
intrude upon the worker’s time nor into his research, provided of 
course that he obeys the act. 
The application made by the individual research worker in the 
United Kingdom does not, in practice, limit a responsible experimental 
approach, at least in the experience of my colleagues and myself. 
Provided that he observes the humane standards of experimentation 
required, he may modify his protocol and the numbers of animals 
involved to suit the research program. The Home Secretary has, 
of course, wide powers, but in practice the research worker and the 
head of the organization in which he is working are expected to 
conform to the general requirements of the act and are left unmolested. 
The research worker must, of course, keep proper records, which 
are open to inspection and which are summarized for filing with the 
Home Office at the end of each calendar year. Despite misconceptions 
