HUMANE TREATMENT OF ANIMALS USED IN RESEARCH HI 
in my experience work extremely well anti prevent the infliction of unnecessary 
pain on experimental animals without in any way restricting the activities of 
genuine scientific research, 
i’ours sincerely, 
(Signed) Brain. 
The Queen’s surgeon, Sir Arthur Porritt, who is president of the 
Eoyal College of Surgeons and is also a fellow of the American 
Society of Clinical Surgery and has been appointed to the Legion 
of Merit of the United States; has written to me as follows : 
Sir Arthur Porritt, 
August 14 , 1962 . 
Dear Major Hume: As I said to you in my letter of August 7. I am more 
than sorry I cannot come to Washington but I am quite sure that you will be 
able to put the case admirably 
As you well know, at the Royal College of Surgeons, we have a large number 
of research departments in which animals are used and, as president, I deal with 
a vast number of requests from establishments outside the college during the 
course of the year. 
Quite honestly, I have never heard of any genuine surgical research being- 
hampered by our present regulations for preventing the infliction of unnecessary 
pain on laboratory animals. 
Much as I admire American surgery and surgeons, I am sure the statement 
that our surgeons have to go to America to learn research is both untrue and 
unworthy. There are certain places and certain projects in America which arc 
unique, but the same applies in this country and I am sure there is very genuine 
mutual respect between both countries, neither of whom would claim inclusive 
rights to the best method in anything. 
I hope your mission is a success. 
Yours sincerely, 
(Signed) Arthur Porritt. 
Here is a letter from another surgeon, Sir Eussell Brock, who is well 
known for his researches on the heart : 
Guy’s Hospital, 
London, England, May 10, 1961. 
Dear Major Hume : Thank you for your letter of May 3 and for the literature 
which you left with me at the time of your visit, and also for the letter in “New 
Scientist” which I think is quite disturbing. 
May I say that I agree with all those people who support the great advantages 
of the normal procedure of control by the Home Oflice of medical research in- 
volving animals in this country. 
I understand that it has been stated that my own early work on congenital 
heart disease was hampered by the restrictions imposed by the Home Oflice 
control. This is definitely not so. 
Before 1948 the governors of Guy’s Hospital, in common with the governors 
of other big charity hospitals, absolutely forbade the use of dogs for experimental 
research. This was through fear of losing donations to the hospital from those 
persons who objected to vivisection. 
When the National Health Service came into being in 1948 the hospital gov- 
ernors no longer controlled the issue of Home Oflice licenses in the medical school 
and we were then completely free to use dogs and, in common with everyone else, 
I found the Home Oflice very helpful in every way. 
Your sincerely, 
(Signed) Russell Brock. 
Here is a letter from Prof. P. B. Medawar, F.E.S., who received the 
Nobel Prize for Medicine and Physiology in I960 and has recently 
become director of our National Institute for Medical Eesearcli ; he 
