[ 88 2 .] 
i5 
Disunion in the Camp . 
Hvisedtion,— not, indeed, “ cutting animals up alive,” as 
vivisedtion is defined when it is desired to harrow up the 
public mind, but still operations which in England would 
lay him open to prosecution. Now, except we can secure 
something more than the “ all ” which Mr. Dolan asks for, 
an English Pasteur would, we think, find himself shut out. 
But the Ledturer continues in a style almost worthy of 
the author of the “ British Dog,” of Miss Cobbe, or of W. 
Howitt : — “ To torture a living animal under the pretence 
of research deserves condemnation ; no language is too 
strong to use against such iniquity ! ” We ask Mr. Dolan 
whether any such cases really occur, or have occurred ? 
Those who take a pleasure in cruelty know well that 
“ research ” is the most unsafe “ pretence ” they could put 
forward. Let them only plead “ sport,” or a wager , then, 
if the vidtim is a wild animal, they may either escape 
punishment altogether, or at most incur a fine of a few 
shillings. That wanton cruelty is abundant, rampant, in 
this country we admit, but it is not inflidted in the service of 
Science. Unless Mr. Dolan knows as a fadt, capable of 
being proved to the satisfadtion of a Court, that such torture 
under “ pretence of research ” does occur, he has been ex- 
ceedingly ill-advised in using the language which we have 
quoted. He must, on refledtion, feel that by so doing he has 
played into the hands of the enemy, who will quote his 
remarks as the admissions of a defender of vivisedtion. He 
goes on, however : — “ Let the Adt stand in force against 
such dabblers in Science, with a tenfold greater severity even 
than at present ; let its punishment be increased, but let us 
discriminate.” Here Mr. Dolan somewhat changes his 
point of view. In the last sentence he was dealing, as we 
understand, with persons who make a mere “ pretence ” of 
Science. But a ‘‘dabbler” is something different from a 
“ pretender,” and we should like to see his definition of the 
former term. Is it a person outside the pale of the medical 
profession ? Or one — medical or non-medical — who has not 
yet acquired celebrity ? Or is it some person whose skill is 
questionable, or whose objedt in experimentation is not suf- 
ficiently definite ? These are points which it will be difficult 
to decide fairly, and which, so long as the miserable Adt 
stands, will always be cropping up. Vivisedtion is trouble- 
some, expensive, and every way unpleasant, and we cannot 
conceive of any person having recourse to it as an amuse- 
ment, or if he sees any other way of solving the problems 
before him. But why even a bungling vivisedtor should be 
punished so much more severely than a cock-fighter, or than 
