DIFFERENT SENSIBILITIES OF DIFFERENT ANIMALS.
(To THE EDITOR or TER "SPECTATOR."]
Stir,—As the issue of the Report of the Royal Commission on Vivisection will doubtless lead to further discussion on the sub- ject, I beg to call attention to points connected with it which I believe have been much overlooked. I have no professional or scientific knowledge on the subject, but during a long life have given much attention to the effect of injuries on and the distribu- tion of the sense of pain aniongst the lower animals, and it is to these points I would call attention.* It is impossible to discuss this subject fully within the limits of a letter, I can merely state that I have long since been led to the opinion that the sense of pain is one of the most necessary we possess ; that it is given to man in the highest degree, as the most in need of it, and bestowed on the various parts of his system in accordance with his necessities as a guard from injuries ; and also that, in like manner, the sense is distributed amongst the lower animals in as great a degree as may be necessary for the preserva- tion of the class to which they belong.
On these grounds, I hold that if vivisection must still be prac- tised (as I believe to some extent it must be), in addition to the use of anesthetics, attention should be given to the degree in which various animals are susceptible of pain ; and I would earnestly support the recommendation of Mr. Hutton, "that dogs and cats should be entirely exempt from vivisection," as I believe they have intelligence and the sense of pain in a far higher degree than many other mammals, and especially rabbits. I will not contend that this higher sensibility to pain may not in some degree be the result of domestication, but I am content to see it as evidence of beneficent design.
Before endeavouring to show that rabbits have the sense of pain in a low degree, it may be well to call attention to the wonderful balance in the animal kingdom, notwithstanding the enormous fecundity of some species. It has been calculated that a cod-fish in one season may deposit nine millions of eggs, i.e., equal in number to one-third of the inhabitants of England, Scotland, and Wales ; and no one who has examined the roe of a codfish could fairly doubt the general correctness of that cal- culation. Yet it is certain that of the produce of these nine million of eggs, two fish, and two only, on an average can arrive at perfect maturity—i.e., to deposit spawn—all others being destroyed at different stages of their growth. That the existence of such fish is necessary for the balance in the animal kingdom can hardly be doubted, and one great result of their being is the supply of food for other creatures. Now, whether designed for that purpose or not, with such amazing fecundity, it is obvious that there must be some check to their increase, and we see a necessity for their destruction. But can there be any necessity for their feeling pain when thus destroyed? Could pain effect any moral or physical good in such a case ? Or can we imagine that in such destruction these creatures should suffer from an unnecessary infliction?
Rabbits on land are somewhat like codfish in the sea, one great consequence of their existence being the supply of food for many other creatures. They are extremely prolific, but their enemies are numerous, and in a really natural state it is probable that not one in a thousand, or perhaps ten times that number, would die of old age, as on becoming inactive they would fall as prey to some of the creatures of which they are the food. They are timid, and rarely or never attempt to bite when taken, or to defend themselves from even the smallest of their enemies. In fact, they are incapable of defence, and their chief protection is their timidity and their sense of seeing and hearing. The eyes are large and prominent, and being on the sides of the head, the rabbit can see both before and behind ; they also see well by night. Their ears are long and like ear-trumpets, so that they may catch the slightest sound, and their timidity keeps them on the alert. But as the natural end of a rabbit is to die from violence, the sense of pain to them would be an infliction, and I shall be able to show that, at most, they have it in but a slight degree.
A large portion of the wild rabbits which are brought to our markets are caught in traps similar to the common rat-trap, but much stronger ; the traps are not made to shut close, as if so, they would cut the rabbit's leg off, or nearly off, at once ; there is, therefore, a space between the teeth when closed, and the teeth are rounded, so as not to cut, but the trap closes with such force as almost invariably to break the rabbit's leg. These traps are usually set in the evening, at the mouth of the rabbit's burrow, and often not looked over till the next morning, so that a poor
• Bee the Quarterly Review, January, 1868.
rabbit may thus be in a trap for many hours, tormented with fear, twisting about with the ends of the broken bones grating together, and this till, at times, it gets away with the loss of a leg.
The escape of a rabbit under such circumstances may perhaps be attributed to its desperate efforts from excessive pain ; I be- lieve it proves the slightness of the pain and excess of fear. Rabbits generally, and probably in all cases, pull away from the trap by sheer force, often leaving with the foot some portion of the tendons drawn from the higher part of the leg, and this is a. very common occurrence. Now I doubt whether any other of our wild animals would do the like. Rats often get away from a trap with the loss of a leg, but in every case where I have ex- amined the trap, it has appeared to me that the leg had been bitten off ; besides which, rat-traps shut close, and cut to some- extent. Polecats, stoats, or weasels will sometimes escape in like- manner, but this is evidently from their biting away from the- trap, as when caught by a fore-leg, so that they cannot bite it off at the broken part, they never escape as the rabbit does, by pull- ing away from the trap, and I feel assured that no cat or dog- could do so. To bite off a leg or foot is very different from pull- ing away from it by force only. A man, if-so caught, might with a sword or knife cut off a foot or leg at the broken part, but it- would be utterly impossible for him to twist off or pull away from a broken limb as the rabbit does.
Another point for consideration is the effect of similar injuries- on different creatures. I have been told that a- polecat almost invariably dies from the wounded leg after being caught in a trap ;- this, however, I cannot assert on my own knowledge, but I know that with rabbits the loss of a leg seems to be of but little con- sequence to them, except from the inconvenience. I have several. times seen a rabbit which had been caught apparently within a. few days after it had lost a leg, when invariably the wound had the appearance of healthy healing, and the animal seemed- to- have been otherwise unaffected by its loss. I once saw a rabbit, still warm from life, which had previously lost three legs, yet, when caught at last, was as far as regards flesh in good condition._ Are there any carnivorous mammalians that could undergo such mutilations with like results?
I have more than once seen a weasel in chase of a rabbit, when the latter, instead of running right away, has gone about within, a small space, apparently bewildered, the enemy following partly by scent and partly by sight, as it would at times raise itself on its hind-legs to look over the grass, and then make a short cut- towards the rabbit. Now during the chase there has been no- cry until the weasel had almost overtaken the rabbit, when the latter has appeared to me paralysed, as it were, and screamed from fear rather than pain, as the cry has been before its enemy- had been upon it. Weasels and animals of its class will bite any- how in defence, but in attacking their ordinary prey they in- variably seize the back of the head, and seldom fail of killing by piercing the brain in the first 'bite, thus causing an instantaneous and probably a painless death. No animal of its size and order- in the system of Nature is more quickly killed than the rabbit, and this I hold as evidence of merciful design, for the-speedy termination of the effects of fear in creatures BO subject to a violent death.
I could advance more on this subject, but would-avoid giving any excuse for wanton injury to any one of the lower animals, and believe I have stated enough to show, that, as regards vivi- section, due regard should be given to the degree in which we- may fairly assume that various animals are susceptible of pain. And if it may be seen that the sense of pain has been withheld where unnecessary, this should be a lesson to man, and teach him not to inflict pain on any animal where it can be avoided, with due consideration of the necessities of mankind. In conclusion, I beg_ that it may not be considered, from my having seen so much of the death or mutilation of rabbits, that I have joined in such slaughter, and thus become indifferent to their sufferings. Such has not been the case. I never killed a rabbit, and have always. had a dislike to kill any creature, but, although painful to myself, I have been present at the death of many and various kinds, not from mere curiosity, but in search of evidence of beneficent design in the distribution of the sense of pain.—I am, Sir, &c.,
Previous page
