EXPERIMENTS ON ANIMALS. 
5 
ORIGINAL ARTICLES. 
SHOULD EXPERIMENTS ON ANIMALS BE RESTRICTED 
OR ABOLISHED?* 
By Robt. Meade Smith, M.D., Professor of Comparative Physiology, University 
of Pennsylvania. 
In 1876, the agitation which for several years had been look¬ 
ing to the abolition of experiments on animals, gained its first 
decisive point in England in the passage by Parliament of what 
is there known as the “ Cruelty to Animals Act.” Under the 
working of this law it is made a criminal offense, punishable by 
fine and imprisonment, for any one, even the most eminent physi¬ 
ologist, unless hampered by the most senseless restrictions, to 
perform any experiment which may entail the least possible pain 
or inconvenience on any vertebrate animal, even if it is known 
that the most valuable results will follow the experiment. Since 
then there has been the most astounding zeal to emulate this ex¬ 
ample of English narrow-mindedness. In New York the intro¬ 
duction and defeat of a similar bill has become a perennial affair, 
while we in Pennsylvania are threatened with a similar fate by a 
society expressly organized for preventing physiological progress. 
Fortunately the good sense of our governing bodies has so far 
prevented the passage of any such obstructive law; but the mis¬ 
directed zeal of the advocates of the prevention of experiments 
on animals has made converts in nearly all groups of society, ex¬ 
cepting only among those who are at all capable of forming any 
opinion as to the value of the arguments brought forward; and 
since scientific men and physicians are rarely found in our Legis¬ 
latures, there is no telling when we may be restricted in our 
attempts to advance the standing of physiology, and thus improve 
our capabilities of relieving and preventing human and animal 
suffering. 
*An introductory address to the course of lectures on Comparative Physiology. 
Reprint from the Therapeutic Gazette. 
