THE CLERGY AND VIVISECTION.
pro TIM EDITOR OF THY " SPECTATOLI
Sta,—Your correspondent, Rev. F. 0: Morris, has displayed his usual high feeling in repudiating, with honest indignation, the charge made against the Clergy of general indifference on the subject of scientific cruelty. Mr. Morris's own excellent sermon and active efforts, the three admirable sermons of Mr. David Wright (the third of which you justly praised last week), the sermons of Dr. Vaughan, of the Temple, of Mr. Husband, of Folkestone, of Dr. Trunlett, of Belsize, and Mr. Ber- nard, of Ripple (just published by our Society), and the invaluable works of Mr. Augustine Chudleigh, are all evid- ences on Mr. Morris's side. To these I may add two excellent speeches by the Bishop of Winchester, and one most weighty one by the Bishop of Oxford, delivered respectively at anti- vivisection meetings in Southampton, Bournemouth, and London. Among the clergy who are members of the Victoria-Street and International Society, we have also the honour to reckon the Bishop of Bath and Wells, the Bishop of Dover, the Dean of Llandaff, Hon. and Rev. James Leigh, Canon Puckle, Dr. Ridding, Archdeacon Whately, the Dean of Tuam, Canon Goddard, Canon Lewis, Canon Wilberforce, and Canon Banes, Mr. H. G. J. Clements, Dr. Craddock, Mr. Foxley, Mr. Mathews, Mr. Sinden, Mr. Verschoyle. Beside these, among the 50,000 signatures which form the annual average of the petitions to Parliament which pass through our office, there are always a very large number of names of clergymen, both of the Church of England and of various Dissenting bodies. Among the former have been those of Canon Carter and Mr. (latch. Among the latter there was on one occasion, at the time when our petitions only asked for stringent restriction of vivisection, the name of every Unitarian minister in the London district, headed by Dr. James Martineau.
Two causes have, I believe, hindered the Clergy from taking. more universally an interest in this subject. The first is the natural and excusable one of the multitude of charities and agitations always clamouring for their attention. The second is less honourable,—their want of either moral courage or of saga- city. They are aware that much of their dogmatic teaching of theology is supposed to be in antagonism to modern science, and they are loth to bring in another element of strife between them and that terrible power. They are, in short, fain to throw the poor brutes overboard, if by so doing they may still those raging waves, and pilot the bark of the Church through the storm. How false and short-sighted is such a policy, it is needless for me to point out; but I have reason, with sorrow, to believe that it had no small share, consciously or unconsciously, in leading to the late deplorable defeat at Oxford.
In conclusion, permit to say that those clergymen who, like Mr. Morris, desire to express publicly their detestation of vivi- section have now an excellent opportunity of so doing. Special petitions praying both Houses of Parliament to pass Mr. Reid's Bill for the total prohibition of vivisection are now in course of signature by clergymen of the Church of England only. Before presentation, the names attached to them will be copied and published.
I earnestly beg every clergyman who desires to put an end to the scientific torture of animals to send for a copy of this peti- tion to our office, and to return it with his signature, and those of as many of his friends as he can obtain. Letters addressed to B. Bryan, Esq., Secretary, 1 Victoria Street, London, S.W., will receive immediate attention.—I am, Sir,
PEANCES POWER COBBE, HOD. SOC.
1 Victoria Street, Easter Monday.
Previous page
