ITO THE BOrroa Or TH11144SPECTATOLt think that in your article
on'"Yiviseetion," in- buit week's Spectator, you are somewhat unfair to "The Sodiety for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals." Prior to the presentation of" the Memorial, the Society bad done all that lay in its power- against Vivisection by the Norwich prosecution,' and it seems tio. me that, but for that prosecution, the Memorial mightnot have- been presented. -What Lord 'Harrow* said on behalf of the Committee-to the deputation angwers,TI think, your remark about ',the Society taking its time." He fetid- that the metnoxialists might desire a -more sanguine expression of opinion from the Committee, but there were difficulties- which required -mature consideration. ',Attempts had been 'made to check Vivigeetion, and it-was not from want- of zeal-if the-Society had not done as much as was expected.
An amendment of the law, relating bOth to-wild animals' and to vivisection,- must be most earnestly desired by all lovers of hu:mane principles, but it is a matter requiring most careful deliberation.. Both these subjects are referred 'to repeatedly in the Society's eseallent periodical, the Animal World, and spetially in its last report. I must further object to your using the adjective "rich,'' with reference to this Society, for in its report it is 'Stated that without increased funds its efficiency cannot be kept up. No one who-knows the work that the Society does can consider it either as "fainéant," or desire that it should exercise "the divine right of abdication," but if any other Society will discharge the same.
duty better, I shall be heartily glad of Sir, &c., A LIFE MEMBER OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY
FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS:
Previous page
