Dr. Walter Robert Hadwen's works.

  • Hadwen, Walter R. (Walter Robert), 1854-1932.
Date:
1896-1908
Catalogue details

Licence: In copyright

Credit: Dr. Walter Robert Hadwen's works. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine Library & Archives Service. The original may be consulted at London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine Library & Archives Service.

    8/324 (page 4)
    actual basis upon which such a result is proposed to be effected? It is this : — That whenever a cutting or other severe operation is to be performed, a Government inspector shall be present in order to see that the animal operated upon is fully under the influence of an anaesthetic. Now there are various fallacies associated with this suggestion : It has been stated by the recognised mouthpiece of the Yivisectors, Mr. Stephen Paget, that the injection of morphia beneath the skin of the animal is absolutely necessary to keep the animal at rest. ] f the administration of morphia be allowed, as it must be allowed under any circumstance, and, indeed, is allowed in the policy of the Restrictionists, no Government inspector, however desirous of qarrying out his duties, could be absolutely certain that the sub- ject was not under the influence of the narcotic rather than of an anaesthetic. And should he happen to be an inspector who holds the convenient theory that morphia itself is an anaesthetic, there would be very little hope for the creature whose interest he was supposed to safeguard. Moreover, the absolute necessity, in consequence of an animal's physical conformation, that it should be firmly fixed to the opera- ting table so that it would be powerless to move, places the kindest- hearted of Government inspectors at a great disadvantage in seek- ing to carry out his duties. The animal is partially narcotised by morphia and fright (or the morphia may be omitted) ; it is fixed firmly to a carefully-devised board, probably gagged, and its faqe covered by a mask ; the corneal reflexes under such conditions are untrustworthy. In what way, then, is he to judge if the animal is anaesthetised effectually or not? A mechanical anaesthetic spray may probably do its work, but ever and anon must come the warning not to push it too far or the animal will be lost. The whole conditions are necessarily different from the anaesthe- tisalion of the human subject. And if the inspector happen to be, as In most likely would be, a friend to the vivisector and to vivi-