HC Deb 22 March 1905 vol 143 cc917-20
SIR FREDERICK BANBURY (Camberwell, Peckham

) in moving the Motion which stood in his name, said the reason he wished to advance for exempting dogs from operations for the purpose of vivisection was that dogs, of all animals, were the most sensitive, and felt pain in a more acute manner than any other animals. It seemed a little ungrateful that they should select for this purpose the animal which was, without doubt their best friend, and inflict upon it the most cruel operations that could possibly be performed. If it was necessary to perform these operations in the interests of science, for goodness sake let them take some other animal which was not so sensitive to pain. The most ardent advocate of vivisection admitted that the dog was an animal which was very sensitive, and trusted in human nature. He felt very keenly upon this question As he had been fortunate enough to get an opportunity of ventilating his views he would like to divide the House upon his Motion, and he appealed to hon. Members on both sides of the House to support him. He begged to move.

MR. CHANNING (Northamptonshire E.)

) seconded.

Motion made and Question proposed—"That, in the opinion of this House no operations for the purposes of Vivisection should be performed on dogs."—(Sir Frederick Banbury.)


) thought this Resolution ought not to pass without a word or two from him. When the hon. Baronet the Member for Peck-ham spoke the result was generally a majority upon the side he represented. He should be very sorry if upon an occasion like this, after such a brief discussion, the House came to a decision upon a matter of so much importance. He thought the House would agree with him that a question like this, which had been the subject of inquiry for many years, and which had been legislated upon, should not be affected by a chance vote in the House of Commons after such a brief discussion. With reference to what had been said about dogs and their qualities no one in the House would deny the truth of those statements. Those who had kept dogs knew that in many of their qualities they surpassed human beings. [Cries of "Divide, divide."]

MR. SWIFT MACNEILL (Donegal, S.) rose in his place, and claimed to move. "That the Question be now put; but Mr. SPEAKER withheld his assent, and declined then to put that Question:—


said what he was endeavouring to point out to the House was that in regard to his sympathy for dogs he entirely agreed with the hon. Baronet who had moved this Resolution. There were, however, many other questions involved. They had got to consider much wider interests.


You are talking against time.


said that, although there was only a few moments remaining for debate, he could not allow this Motion to pass without saying a few words upon it. Legislation had already been passed upon this subject——

And, it being midnight, the debate stood adjourned.

Forward to