HC Deb 18 February 1904 vol 130 c248
MR. OSMOND WILLIAMS

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that Professor Starling, in giving evidence in the case of Bayliss v. Coleridge, stated on the 13th November, 1903, that on the 2nd February, 1903, he performed an operation on a brown dog, and, instead of killing the dog as provided by the Cruelty to Animals Act, 1876, handed it to Mr. Bayliss for another experiment; and, if so, whether, in view of Section 14 of this Act, he proposes to take any action.

* MR. AKERS-DOUGLAS

I considered most carefully all the facts of this case both before and at the time of the Action referred to and I came to the conclusion, which I see no reason to vary, that I was not called upon to take action.

MR. SWIFT MACNEILL (Donegal, S.)

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that since 1876 no prosecution for vivisection has been instituted?