,,animals' ,,rights ,,animals' ,,rights ,,considered ,,in ,,relation ,,to ,,social ,,progress ,,by ,,henry ,s4 ,,salt ,,revised ,,edition ,,london ,g4 ,,bell ,,and ,,sons1 ,,ltd4 ,,york ,,house1 ,,portugal ,,street #aibb ,,to ,,my ,,friend ,,howard ,,williams ,,and ,,other ,,humanitarian ,,colleagues ,,preface ,as a memorial of work done on behalf of the rights of animals1 it has been thought fitting1 by members and friends of the late ,humanitarian ,league1 that a new edition of this little book should be published in the year that brings the centenary of 8,martin's ,act10 the first legislation for the prevention of cruelty to the non-human races4 ,of the progress made in this branch of ethics1 since #ahbb1 some account is incidentally given in the book2 and during the last few years the advance has been steadily continued4 ,attention has been drawn1 for instance1 to the antiquated methods employed in the slaughter of animals for food2 and this has corresponded with an increase in the practice of vegetarianism4 ,the treatment of other domestic animals1 such as pit ponies1 and the worn-out horses exported to the ,continent1 has stirred the public conscience2 and at the same time the cruelty and folly of what is technically known as 8the wild animal industry0--the kidnapping of 8specimens0 for exhibition in zoological gardens1 or as 8performing animals0 on the stage--are becoming better understood4 ,again1 the disgust caused by the ravages of 8murderous millinery0 7a term first used as a chapter-heading in this book7 has taken visible shape in the recent ,act for the regulation of the plumage trade2 and even 8sport10 the last and dearest stronghold of the savage1 has been seriously menaced1 not only by the discontinuance of the ,royal ,buckhounds in #aija1 but also lately by the emphatic condemnation of pigeon-shooting4 ,the core of the contention for a recognition of the rights of animals will be found in the following passage of a letter addressed by ,mr4 ,thomas ,hardy to the ,humanitarian ,league in #aiaj3 8,few people seem to perceive fully as yet that the most far-reaching consequence of the establishment of the common origin of all species is ethical2 that it logically involved a readjustment of altruistic morals1 by enlarging1 as a necessity of rightness1 the application of what has been called #8,the ,golden ,rule' from the area of mere mankind to that of the whole animal kingdom4444 ,while man was deemed to be a creation apart from all other creations1 a secondary or tertiary morality was considered good enough to practise towards the #8inferior' races2 but no person who reasons nowadays can escape the trying conclusion that this is not maintainable40 ,it may be taken1 perhaps1 as a sign of the extension of humane ideas that1 since its first appearance in #ahib1 this essay on 8,animals' ,rights0 has passed through numerous editions1 and has been translated into ,french1 ,german1 ,dutch1 ,swedish1 and other ,european tongues4 ,valuable suggestions concerning the book have reached me from several friends3 in particular ,i am indebted to ,sir ,george ,greenwood1 who has been actively associated1 both in ,parliament and elsewhere1 with the cause of justice to animals4 ,h4 ,s4 ,s4 ,january #aibb4 ,,contents4 ,,chap4 ,,page ,i4 ,,the ,,principle ,,of ,,animals' ,,rights #a ,,ii4 ,,the ,,case ,,of ,,domestic ,,animals #bc ,,iii4 ,,the ,,case ,,of ,,wild ,,animals #cd ,,iv4 ,,the ,,slaughter ,,of ,,animals ,,for ,,food #da ,v4 ,,sport1 ,,or ,,amateur ,,butchery #ej ,,vi4 ,,murderous ,,millinery #ei ,,vii4 ,,experimental ,,torture #fg ,,viii4 ,,lines ,,of ,,reform #gg ,,appendices #ie ,,bibliography #aag ,,index #abc ,,animals' ,,rights4 ,,chapter ,i4 ,,the ,,principle ,,of ,,animals' ,,rights4 ,have the lower animals 8rights08 ,undoubtedly--if men have4 ,that is the point ,i wish to make evident in this opening chapter4 ,but have men rights8 ,let it be stated at the outset that ,i have no intention of discussing the abstract theory of rights1 which at the present time is looked upon with suspicion and disfavour by many social reformers1 since it has not unfrequently been made to cover the most extravagant and contradictory assertions4 ,but though its phraseology is vague1 there is nevertheless a solid truth underlying it--a truth which has always been clearly apprehended by the moral faculty1 however difficult it may be to establish it on an unassailable logical basis4 ,if men have not 8rights0--well1 they have an unmistakable intimation of something very similar2 a sense of justice which marks the boundary-line where acquiescence ceases and resistance begins2 a demand for freedom to live their own lives1 subject to the necessity of respecting the equal freedom of other people4 ,such is the doctrine of rights as formulated by ,herbert ,spencer4 8,every man10 he says1 8is free to do that which he wills1 provided he infringes not the equal liberty of any other man40 ,and again1 8,whoever admits that each man must have a certain restricted freedom1 asserts that it is right he should have this restricted freedom4444 ,and hence the several particular freedoms deducible may fitly be called1 as they commonly are called1 his rights0 78,justice10 pp4 #df1 #fb74a ,the fitness of this nomenclature is disputed1 but the existence of some real principle of the kind can hardly be called in question2 so that the controversy concerning 8rights0 is little else than an academic battle over words1 which leads to no practical conclusion4 ,i shall assume1 therefore1 that men are possessed of 8rights10 in the sense of ,herbert ,spencer's definition2 and if any of my readers object to this qualified use of the term1 ,i can only say that ,i shall be perfectly willing to change the word as soon as a more appropriate one is forthcoming4#b ,the immediate question that claims our attention is this--if men have rights1 have animals their rights also8 ,from the earliest times there have been thinkers who1 directly or indirectly1 answered this question with an affirmative4 ,the ,buddhist and ,pythagorean canons1 dominated perhaps by the creed of reincarnation1 included the maxim 8not to kill or injure any innocent animal40 ,the humanitarian philosophers of the ,roman empire1 among whom ,seneca1 ,plutarch1 and ,porphyry were the most conspicuous1 took still higher ground in preaching humanity on the broadest principle of universal benevolence4 8,since justice is due to rational beings10 wrote ,porphyry1 8how is it possible to evade the admission that we are bound also to act justly towards the races below us80 ,it is a lamentable fact that during the churchdom of the middle ages1 from the fourth century to the sixteenth1 from the time of ,porphyry to the time of ,montaigne1 little or no attention was paid to the question of the rights and wrongs of the lower races4 ,then1 with the ,reformation and the revival of learning1 came a revival also of humanitarian feeling1 as may be seen in many passages of ,erasmus and ,more1 ,shakespeare and ,bacon2 but it was not until the eighteenth century1 the age of enlightenment and 8sensibility10 of which ,voltaire and ,rousseau were the spokesmen1 that the rights of animals obtained more deliberate recognition4 ,from the great ,revolution of #aghi dates the period when the world-wide spirit of humanitarianism1 which had hitherto been felt by but one man in a million--the thesis of the philosopher or the vision of the poet--began to disclose itself1 gradually and dimly at first1 as an essential feature of democracy4 ,a great and far-reaching effect was produced in ,england at this time by the publication of such revolutionary works as ,thomas ,paine's 8,rights of ,man0 and ,mary ,wollstonecraft's 8,vindication of the ,rights of ,woman02 and looking back now1 after the lapse of a hundred years1 we can see that a still wider extension of the theory of rights was thenceforth inevitable4 ,in fact1 such a claim was anticipated--if only in bitter jest--by a contemporary writer1 who furnishes us with a notable instance of how the mockery of one generation may become the reality of the next4 ,there was published anonymously in #agib a little volume entitled 8,a ,vindication of the ,rights of ,brutes10#c a reductio ad absurdum of ,mary ,wollstonecraft's essay1 written1 as the author informs us1 8to evince by demonstrative arguments the perfect equality of what is called the irrational species to the human40 ,the further opinion is expressed that 8after those wonderful productions of ,mr4 ,paine and ,mrs4 ,wollstonecraft1 such a theory as the present seems to be necessary40 ,it was necessary2 and a very short term of years sufficed to bring it into effect2 indeed1 the theory had already been put forward by several ,english pioneers of nineteenth-century humanitarianism4 ,to ,jeremy ,bentham1 in particular1 belongs the high honour of first asserting the rights of animals with authority and persistence4 8,the legislator10 he wrote1 8ought to interdict everything which may serve to lead to cruelty4 ,the barbarous spectacles of gladiators no doubt contributed to give the ,romans that ferocity which they displayed in their civil wars4 ,a people accustomed to despise human life in their games could not be expected to respect it amid the fury of their passions4 ,it is proper for the same reason to forbid every kind of cruelty towards animals1 whether by way of amusement1 or to gratify gluttony4 ,cock-fights1 bull-baiting1 hunting hares and foxes1 fishing1 and other amusements of the same kind1 necessarily suppose either the absence of reflection or a fund of inhumanity1 since they produce the most acute sufferings to sensible beings1 and the most painful and lingering death of which we can form any idea4 ,why should the law refuse its protection to any sensitive being8 ,the time will come when humanity will extend its mantle over everything which breathes4 ,we have begun by attending to the condition of slaves2 we shall finish by softening that of all the animals which assist our labours or supply our wants40#d ,so1 too1 wrote one of ,bentham's contemporaries3 8,the grand source of the unmerited and superfluous misery of beasts exists in a defect in the constitution of all communities4 ,no human government1 ,i believe1 has ever recognized the jus animalium1 which ought surely to form a part of the jurisprudence of every system founded on the principles of justice and humanity40#e ,a number of later moralists have followed on the same lines1 with the result that the rights of animals have already1 to a certain limited extent1 been established both in private usage and by legal enactment4 ,it is interesting to note the exact commencement of this new principle in law4 ,when ,lord ,erskine1 speaking in the ,house of ,lords in #ahaa1 advocated the cause of justice to the lower animals1 he was greeted with loud cries of insult and derision4 ,but eleven years later the efforts of the despised humanitarians1 and especially of ,richard ,martin1 of ,galway1 were rewarded by their first success4 ,the passing of the ,ill-treatment of ,cattle ,bill1 commonly known as 8,martin's ,act10 in ,july1 #ahbb1 is a memorable date in the history of humane legislation1 less on account of the positive protection afforded by it1 for it applied only to cattle and 8beasts of burden10 than for the invaluable precedent which it created4 ,from #ahbb onward1 the principle of that jus animalium for which ,bentham had pleaded1 was recognized1 however partially and tentatively at first1 by ,english law1 and the animals included in the ,act ceased to be the mere property of their owners2 moreover the ,act has been several times supplemented and extended during the past half century4 ,it is scarcely possible1 in the face of this legislation1 to maintain that 8rights0 are a privilege with which none but human beings can be invested2 for if some animals are already included within the pale of protection1 why should not more and more be so included in the future8#f ,for the present1 however1 what is most urgently needed is some comprehensive and intelligible principle1 which shall indicate1 in a more consistent manner1 the true lines of man's moral relation towards the lower animals4 ,hitherto even the leading advocates of animals' rights seem to have shrunk from basing their claim on the only argument which can ultimately be held to be a sufficient one--the assertion that animals1 as well as men1 though1 of course1 to a far less extent than men1 are possessed of a distinctive individuality1 and therefore are in justice entitled to live their lives with a due measure of that 8restricted freedom0 to which ,herbert ,spencer alludes4 ,it is of little use to claim 8rights0 for animals in a vague general way1 if with the same breath we explicitly show our determination to subordinate those rights to anything and everything that can be construed into a human 8want02 nor will it ever be possible to obtain full justice for the lower races so long as we continue to regard them as beings of a wholly different order1 and to ignore the significance of their numberless points of kinship with mankind4 ,for example1 it has been said by a well-known writer on the subject of humanity to animals#g that 8the life of a brute1 having no moral purpose1 can best be understood ethically as representing the sum of its pleasures2 and the obligation1 therefore1 of producing the pleasures of sentient creatures must be reduced1 in their case1 to the abstinence from unnecessary destruction of life40 ,now1 with respect to this statement1 ,i must say that the notion of the life of an animal having 8no moral purpose0 belongs to a class of ideas which cannot possibly be accepted by the advanced humanitarian thought of the present day--it is a purely arbitrary assumption1 at variance with our best science1 and absolutely fatal 7if the subject be clearly thought out7 to any full realization of animals' rights4 ,if we are ever going to do justice to the lower races1 we must get rid of the antiquated notion of a 8great gulf0 fixed between them and mankind1 and must recognize the common bond of humanity that unites all living beings in one universal brotherhood4 ,as far as any excuses can be alleged1 in explanation of the insensibility or inhumanity of the western nations in their treatment of animals1 these excuses may be mostly traced back to one or the other of two theories1 wholly different in origin1 yet alike in this--that both postulate an absolute difference of nature between men and the lower kinds4 ,the first is the so-called 8religious0 notion1 which awards immortality to man1 but to man alone1 thereby furnishing 7especially in ,catholic countries7 a quibbling justification for acts of cruelty to animals1 on the plea that they 8have no souls40 8,it should seem10 says ,mrs4 ,jameson1#h 8as if the primitive ,christians1 by laying so much stress upon a future life1 in contradistinction to this life1 and placing the lower creatures out of the pale of hope1 placed them at the same time out of the pale of sympathy1 and thus laid the foundation for this utter disregard of animals in the light of our fellow-creatures40 ,i am aware that a quite contrary argument has1 in a few isolated instances1 been founded on the belief that animals have 8no souls40 8,cruelty to a brute10 says an old writer1#i 8is an injury irreparable10 because there is no future life to be a compensation for present afflictions2 and there is an amusing story1 told by ,mr4 ,lecky in his 8,history of ,european ,morals10 of a certain humanely-minded ,cardinal1 who used to allow vermin to bite him without hindrance1 on the ground that 8we shall have heaven to reward us for our sufferings1 but these poor creatures have nothing but the enjoyment of this present life40 ,but this is a rare view of the question which need not1 ,i think1 be taken into very serious account2 for1 on the whole1 the denial of immortality to animals 7unless1 of course1 it be also denied to men7 tends strongly to lessen their chance of being justly and considerately treated4 ,among the many humane movements of the present age1 none is more significant than the growing inclination1 noticeable both in scientific circles and in religious1 to believe that mankind and the lower animals have the same destiny before them4#aj ,the second and not less fruitful source of modern inhumanity is to be found in the 8,cartesian0 doctrine--the theory of ,descartes and his followers--that the lower animals are devoid of consciousness and feeling2 a theory which carried the 8religious0 notion a step further1 and deprived the animals not only of their claim to a life hereafter1 but of anything that could1 without mockery1 be called a life in the present1 since mere 8animated machines10 as they were thus affirmed to be1 could in no real sense be said to live at all6 ,well might ,voltaire turn his humane ridicule against this most monstrous contention1 and suggest1 with scathing irony1 that ,god 8had given the animals the organs of feeling1 to the end that they might not feel60 8,the theory of animal automatism10 says ,professor ,romanes1 8which is usually attributed to ,descartes1 can never be accepted by common sense40 ,yet it is to be feared that it has done much1 in its time1 to harden 8scientific0 sense against the just complaints of the victims of human arrogance and oppression4#aa ,let me here quote a most impressive passage from ,schopenhauer4 8,the unpardonable forgetfulness in which the lower animals have hitherto been left by the moralists of ,europe is well known4 ,it is pretended that the beasts have no rights4 ,they persuade themselves that our conduct in regard to them has nothing to do with morals1 or 7to speak the language of their morality7 that we have no duties towards animals3 a doctrine revolting1 gross1 and barbarous1 peculiar to the west1 and having its root in ,judaism4 ,in philosophy1 however1 it is made to rest upon a hypothesis1 admitted in despite of evidence itself1 of an absolute difference between man and beast4 ,it is ,descartes who has proclaimed it in the clearest and most decisive manner2 and in fact it was a necessary consequence of his errors4 ,the ,cartesian-,leibnitzian-,wolfian philosophy1 with the assistance of entirely abstract notions1 had built up the #8rational psychology1' and constructed an immortal anima rationalis3 but1 visibly1 the world of beasts1 with its very natural claims1 stood up against this exclusive monopoly--this brevet of immortality decreed to man alone--and silently ,nature did what she always does in such cases--she protested4 ,our philosophers1 feeling their scientific conscience quite disturbed1 were forced to attempt to consolidate their #8rational psychology' by the aid of empiricism4 ,they therefore set themselves to work to hollow out between man and beast an enormous abyss1 of an immeasurable width2 by this they wish to prove to us1 in contempt of evidence1 an impassable difference40#ab ,the fallacious idea that the lives of animals have no moral purpose is at root connected with these religious and philosophical pretensions which ,schopenhauer so powerfully condemns4 ,to live one's own life--to realize one's true self--is the highest moral purpose of man and animal alike2 and that animals possess their due measure of this sense of individuality is scarcely open to doubt4 8,we have seen10 says ,darwin1 8that the senses and intuitions1 the various emotions and faculties1 such as love1 memory1 attention1 curiosity1 imitation1 reason1 etc41 of which man boasts1 may be found in an incipient1 or even sometimes in a well-developed condition1 in the lower animals40#ac ,not less emphatic is the testimony of the ,rev4 ,j4 ,g4 ,wood1 who1 speaking from a great experience1 gives it as his opinion that 8the manner in which we ignore individuality in the lower animals is simply astounding40 ,he claims for them a future life1 because he is 8quite sure that most of the cruelties which are perpetrated on the animals are due to the habit of considering them as mere machines without susceptibilities1 without reason1 and without the capacity of a future40#ad ,the long-maintained distinction between human 8reason0 and animal 8instinct0 is being given up by recent scientific writers1 as1 for example1 by ,dr4 ,wesley ,mills in his work on 8,the ,nature and ,development of ,animal ,intelligence10 and by ,mr4 ,e4 ,p4 ,evans in 8,evolutional ,ethics and ,animal ,psychology40 8,the trend of investigation10 says ,dr4 ,mills1 8thus far goes to show that at least the germ of every human faculty does exist in some species of animal4444 ,formerly the line was drawn at reason4 ,it was said that the #8brutes' cannot reason4 ,only persons who do not themselves reason about the subject with the facts before them can any longer occupy such a position4 ,the evidence of reasoning power is overwhelming for the upper ranks of animals1 and yearly the downward limits are being extended the more the inferior tribes are studied40 ,we have to get rid1 as ,mr4 ,evans points out1 of those 8anthropocentric0 delusions which 8treat man as a being essentially different and inseparably set apart from all other sentient creatures1 to which he is bound by no ties of mental affinity or moral obligation40 8,man is as truly a part and product of ,nature as any other animal1 and this attempt to set him up as an isolated point outside of it is philosophically false and morally pernicious40 ,this1 then1 is the position of those who assert that animals1 like men1 are possessed of certain limited rights1 which cannot be withheld from them1 as they are now withheld1 without tyranny and injustice4 ,they have individuality1 character1 reason2 and to have those qualities is to have the right to exercise them1 in so far as surrounding circumstances permit4 ,no human being is justified in regarding an animal as a meaningless automaton1 to be worked1 or tortured1 or eaten1 as the case may be1 for the mere object of satisfying the wants or whims of mankind4 ,together with the destinies and duties that are laid on them and fulfilled by them1 animals have also the right to be treated with gentleness and consideration1 and the man who does not so treat them1 however great his learning or influence may be1 is1 in that respect1 an ignorant and foolish man1 devoid of the highest and noblest culture of which the human mind is capable4 ,something must here be said on the important subject of nomenclature4 ,it is to be feared that the ill-treatment of animals is largely caused--or at any rate the difficulty of amending that treatment is largely aggravated--by the common use of such terms as 8brute-beast10 8live-stock10 etc41 which implicitly deny to the lower races that intelligent individuality which is undoubtedly possessed by them4 ,it was long ago remarked by ,bentham1 in his 8,introduction to ,principles of ,morals and ,legislation10 that1 whereas human beings are styled persons1 8other animals1 on account of their interests having been neglected by the insensibility of the ancient jurists1 stand degraded into the class of things02 and ,schopenhauer also has commented on the mischievous absurdity of the idiom which applies the neuter pronoun 8it0 to such highly-organized animals as the dog and the ape4 ,a word of protest is needed also against such an expression as 8dumb animals10 which1 though often cited as 8an immense exhortation to pity10#ae has in reality a tendency to influence ordinary people in quite the contrary direction1 inasmuch as it fosters the idea of an impassable barrier between mankind and their dependents4 ,it is convenient to us men to be deaf to the entreaties of the victims of our injustice2 and1 by a sort of grim irony1 we therefore assume that it is they who are afflicted by some organic incapacity--they are 8dumb animals10 forsooth6 although a moment's consideration must prove that they have innumerable ways1 often quite human in variety and suggestiveness1 of uttering their thoughts and emotions4 ,even the term 8animals10 as applied to the lower races1 is incorrect1 and not wholly unobjectionable1 since it ignores the fact that man is an animal no less than they4 ,my only excuse for using it in this volume is that there is no better brief term available4 ,so anomalous is the attitude of man towards the lower animals1 that it is no marvel if many humane thinkers have wellnigh despaired over this question4 8,the whole subject of the brute creation10 wrote ,dr4 ,arnold1 8is to me one of such painful mystery1 that ,i dare not approach it02 and this 7to put the most charitable interpretation on their silence7 appears to be the position of the majority of moralists and teachers at the present time4 ,yet there is urgent need of some solution of the problem2 and in no other way can this be found than by the admission of the lower races within the pale of human sympathy4 ,all the promptings of our best and surest instincts point us in this direction4 8,it is abundantly evident10 says ,lecky1 8both from history and from present experience1 that the instinctive shock1 or natural feelings of disgust1 caused by the sight of the sufferings of men1 is not generically different from that which is caused by the sight of the suffering of animals40 ,if this be so1 can it be seriously contended that the same humanitarian tendency which has already emancipated the slave1 will not ultimately benefit the lower races also8 ,here1 again1 the historian of 8,european ,morals0 has a significant remark3 8,at one time the benevolent affections embrace merely the family1 soon the circle expanding includes first a class1 then a nation1 then a coalition of nations1 then all humanity2 and finally its influence is felt in the dealings of man with the animal world4 ,in each of these cases a standard is formed1 different from that of the preceding stage1 but in each case the same tendency is recognized as virtue40 ,but1 it may be argued1 vague sympathy with the lower animals is one thing1 and a definite recognition of their 8rights0 is another2 what reason is there to suppose that we shall advance from the former phase to the latter8 ,just this2 that every great liberating movement has proceeded exactly on such lines4 ,oppression and cruelty are invariably founded on a lack of imaginative sympathy2 the tyrant or tormentor can have no true sense of kinship with the victim of his injustice4 ,when once the sense of affinity is awakened1 the knell of tyranny is sounded1 and the ultimate concession of 8rights0 is simply a matter of time4 ,the present condition of the more highly-organized domestic animals is in many ways very analogous to that of the negro slaves of a hundred years ago3 look back1 and you will find in their case precisely the same exclusion from the common pale of humanity2 the same hypocritical fallacies1 to justify that exclusion2 and1 as a consequence1 the same deliberate stubborn denial of their social 8rights40 ,look back--for it is well to do so--and then look forward1 and the moral can hardly be mistaken4 ,we find so great a thinker as ,aristotle seriously pondering1 in his 8,ethics10 whether a slave may be considered as a fellow-being4 ,in emphasizing the point that friendship is founded on propinquity1 he expresses himself as follows3 8,neither can men have friendships with horses1 cattle1 or slaves1 considered merely as such2 for a slave is merely a living instrument1 and an instrument a lifeless slave4 ,yet1 considered as a man1 a slave may be an object of friendship1 for certain rights seem to belong to all those capable of participating in law and engagement40 ,slaves1 says ,bentham1 8have been treated by the law exactly upon the same footing as in ,england1 for example1 the inferior races of animals are still4 ,the day may come when the rest of the animal creation may acquire those rights which could never have been withholden from them but by the hand of tyranny40 ,let us unreservedly admit the immense difficulties that stand in the way of this animal enfranchisement4 ,our relation towards the animals is complicated and embittered by innumerable habits handed down through centuries of brutality and mistrust2 we cannot1 in all cases1 suddenly relax these habits1 or do full justice even where we see that justice will have to be done4 ,a perfect ethic of humaneness is therefore impracticable1 if not unthinkable2 and we can attempt to do no more than to indicate in a general way the main principle of animals' rights1 noting at the same time the most flagrant particular violations of those rights1 and the lines on which the only valid reform can hereafter be effected4 ,but1 on the other hand1 it may be remembered1 for the comfort and encouragement of humanitarian workers1 that these obstacles are1 after all1 only such as are inevitable in each branch of social improvement2 for at every stage of every great reformation it has been repeatedly argued1 by indifferent or hostile observers1 that further progress is impossible2 indeed1 when the opponents of a great cause begin to demonstrate its 8impossibility10 experience teaches us that that cause is already on the high road to fulfilment4 ,as for the demand so frequently made on reformers1 that they should first explain the details of their scheme--how this and that point will be arranged1 and by what process all kinds of difficulties1 real or imagined1 will be circumvented--the only rational reply is that it is absurd to expect to see the end of a question when we are now but at its beginning4 ,the persons who offer this futile sort of criticism are usually those who under no circumstances would be open to conviction2 they purposely ask for an explanation which1 by the very nature of the case1 is impossible because it necessarily belongs to a later period of time4 ,it would be equally sensible to request a traveller to enumerate beforehand all the particular things he will see by the way1 on pain of being denounced as an unpractical visionary1 although he may have a quite sufficient general knowledge of his course and destination4 ,our main principle is now clear4 ,if 8rights0 exist at all--and both feeling and usage indubitably prove that they do exist--they cannot be consistently awarded to men and denied to animals1 since the same sense of justice and compassion apply in both cases4 8,pain is pain10 says ,humphry ,primatt1 8whether it be inflicted on man or on beast2 and the creature that suffers it1 whether man or beast1 being sensible of the misery of it while it lasts1 suffers evil2 and the sufferance of evil1 unmeritedly1 unprovokedly1 where no offence has been given1 and no good can possibly be answered by it1 but merely to exhibit power or gratify malice1 is ,cruelty and ,injustice in him that occasions it40 ,i commend this outspoken utterance to the attention of those ingenious moralists who quibble about the 8discipline0 of suffering1 and deprecate immediate attempts to redress what1 it is alleged1 may be a necessary instrument for the attainment of human welfare4 ,it is perhaps a mere coincidence1 but it may be observed that those who are most forward to disallow the rights of others1 and to argue that suffering and subjection are the natural lot of all living things1 are usually themselves exempt from the operation of this beneficent law1 and that the beauty of self-sacrifice is most loudly belauded by those who profit most largely at the expense of their fellow-beings4 ,but 8nature is one with rapine10 say some1 and this utopian theory of 8rights10 if too widely extended1 must come in conflict with that iron rule of internecine competition by which the universe is regulated4 ,but is the universe so regulated8 ,we note that this very objection1 which was confidently relied on a few years back by many opponents of the emancipation of the working-classes1 is not heard of in that connection now4 ,our learned economists and men of science1 who set themselves to play the defenders of the social status quo1 have seen their own weapons of 8natural selection10 8survival of the fittest10 and what not1 snatched from their hands and turned against them1 and are therefore beginning to explain to us1 in a scientific manner1 what we untutored humanitarians had previously felt to be true1 viz41 that competition is not by any means the sole governing law among the human race4 ,we are not greatly dismayed1 then1 to find the same old bugbear trotted out as an argument against animals' rights--indeed1 we see already unmistakable signs of a similar reversal of the scientific judgment4#af ,the charge of 8sentimentalism0 is frequently brought against those who plead for animals' rights4 ,now 8sentimentalism10 if any meaning at all can be attached to the word1 must signify an inequality1 an ill balance of sentiment1 an inconsistency which leads men into attacking one abuse1 while they ignore or condone another where a reform is equally desirable4 ,that this weakness is often observable among 8philanthropists0 on the one hand1 and 8friends of animals0 on the other1 and most of all among those acute 8men of the world10 whose regard is only for themselves1 ,i am not concerned to deny2 what ,i wish to point out is1 that the only real safeguard against sentimentality is to take up a consistent position towards the rights of men and of the lower animals alike1 and to cultivate a broad sense of universal justice 7not 8mercy07 for all living things4 ,herein1 and herein alone1 is to be sought the true sanity of temperament4 ,it is an entire mistake to suppose that the rights of animals are in any way antagonistic to the rights of men4 ,let us not be betrayed for a moment into the specious fallacy that we must study human rights first1 and leave the animal question to solve itself hereafter2 for it is only by a wide and disinterested study of both subjects that a solution of either is possible4 8,for he who loves all animated nature10 says ,porphyry1 8will not hate any one tribe of innocent beings1 and by how much greater his love for the whole1 by so much the more will he cultivate justice towards a part of them1 and that part to which he is most allied40 ,to omit all worthier reasons1 it is too late in the day to suggest the indefinite postponement of a consideration of animals' rights1 for from a moral point of view1 and even from a legislative point of view1 we are daily confronted with the problem1 and the so-called 8practical0 people who affect to ignore it are simply shutting their eyes to facts which they find it disagreeable to confront4 ,once more then1 animals have rights1 and these rights consist in the 8restricted freedom0 to live a natural life--a life1 that is1 which permits of the individual development--subject to the limitations imposed by the permanent needs and interests of the community4 ,there is nothing quixotic or visionary in this assertion2 it is perfectly compatible with a readiness to look the sternest laws of existence fully and honestly in the face4 ,if we must kill1 whether it be man or animal1 let us kill and have done with it2 if we must inflict pain1 let us do what is inevitable1 without hypocrisy1 or evasion1 or cant4 ,but 7here is the cardinal point7 let us first be assured that it is necessary2 let us not wantonly trade on the needless miseries of other beings1 and then attempt to lull our consciences by a series of shuffling excuses which cannot endure a moment's candid investigation4 ,as ,leigh ,hunt well says3 8,that there is pain and evil1 is no rule ,that ,i should make it greater1 like a fool40 ,thus far the general principle of animals' rights4 ,we will now proceed to apply this principle to a number of particular cases1 from which we may learn something both as to the extent of its present violation1 and the possibility of its better observance in the future4 ,,chapter ,,ii4 ,,the ,,case ,,of ,,domestic ,,animals4 ,the main principle of animals' rights1 if admitted to be fundamentally sound1 will not be essentially affected by the wildness or the domesticity1 as the case may be1 of the animals in question2 both classes have their rights1 though these rights may differ largely in extent and importance4 ,it is convenient1 however1 to consider the subject of the domestic animals apart from that of the wild ones1 inasmuch as their whole relation to mankind is so much altered and emphasized by the fact of their subjection4 ,here1 at any rate1 it is impossible1 even for the most callous reasoners1 to deny the responsibility of man1 in his dealings with vast races of beings1 the very conditions of whose existence have been modified by human civilization4 ,an incalculable mass of drudgery1 at the cost of incalculable suffering1 is daily1 hourly performed for the benefit of man by these honest1 patient labourers in every town and country of the world4 ,are these countless services to be permanently ignored in a community which makes any pretension to a humane civilization8 ,will the free citizens of the enlightened republics of the future be content to reap the immense advantages of animals' labour1 without recognizing that they owe them some consideration in return8 ,the question is one that carries with it its own answer4#ag ,but the human mind is subtle to evade the full significance of its duties1 and nowhere is this more conspicuously seen than in our treatment of the lower races4 ,given a position in which man profits largely 7or thinks he profits largely1 for it is not always a matter of certainty7 by the toil or suffering of the animals1 and our respectable moralists are pretty sure to be explaining to us that this providential arrangement is 8better for the animals themselves40 ,the wish is father to the thought in these questions1 and there is an accommodating elasticity in our social ethics that permits of the justification of almost any system which it would be inconvenient to us to discontinue4 ,thus we find it stated1 and on the authority of a bishop1 that man may 8lay down the terms of the social contract between animals and himself10 because1 forsooth1 8the general life of a domestic animal is one of very great comfort--according to the animal's own standard 7sic7 probably one of almost perfect happiness40#ah ,now this prating about 8the animal's own standard0 is nothing better than hypocritical cant4 ,if man is obliged to lay down the terms of the contract1 let him at least do so without having recourse to such a suspiciously opportune afterthought4 ,we have taken the animals from a free1 natural state1 into an artificial thraldom1 in order that we1 and not they1 may be the gainers thereby2 it cannot possibly be maintained that they owe us gratitude on this account1 or that this alleged debt may be used as a means of evading the just recognition of their rights4 ,it is the more necessary to raise a strong protest against this jesuitical mode of reasoning1 because1 as we shall see1 it is so frequently employed1 in one form or another1 by the apologists of human tyranny4 ,on the other hand1 ,i desire to keep clear also of the extreme contrary contention1 that man is not morally justified in imposing any sort of subjection on the lower animals4#ai ,an abstract question of this sort1 however interesting as a speculation1 and impossible in itself to disprove1 is beyond the scope of the present inquiry1 which is primarily concerned with the state of things at present existing4 ,we must face the fact that the services of domestic animals have become1 whether rightly or wrongly1 an integral portion of the system of modern society2 we cannot immediately dispense with those services1 any more than we can dispense with human labour itself4 ,but we can provide1 as at least a present step towards a more ideal relationship in the future1 that the conditions under which all labour is performed1 whether by men or by animals1 shall be such as to enable the worker to take some appreciable pleasure in the work1 instead of experiencing a lifelong course of injustice and ill-treatment4 ,and here it may be convenient to say a word as to the existing line of demarcation between the animals legally recognized as 8domestic10 and those fer natur1 of wild nature4 ,in the ,act of #ahdi1 in which a penalty was imposed for cruelty to 8any animal10 it was expressly provided that 8,the word animal shall be taken to mean any horse1 mare1 gelding1 bull1 ox1 cow1 heifer1 steer1 calf1 mule1 ass1 sheep1 lamb1 hog1 pig1 sow1 goat1 dog1 cat1 or any other domestic animal40 ,but as time went on1 and public opinion was more sensitive1 the interpretation of this vague reference to 8any other domestic animal0 became a point of considerable importance1 since it closely affected the welfare of certain captive animals which1 though regarded as wild1 and therefore outside the pale of protection1 were to all intents and purposes in a state of domestication4 ,the ,act of #ahdi was accordingly amended by the ,wild ,animals in ,captivity ,act of #aijj1 which made it an offence to maltreat a wild animal while actually in a state of captivity4 7,see also the ,act of #aiaa1 infra p4 #cd47 8,food1 rest1 and tender usage10 were declared by ,humphry ,primatt1 the old author already quoted1 to be the three rights of the domestic animals4 ,lawrence's opinion was to much the same effect4 8,man is indispensably bound to bestow upon animals1 in return for the benefit he derives from their services1 good and sufficient nourishment1 comfortable shelter1 and merciful treatment2 to commit no wanton outrage upon their feelings1 whilst alive1 and to put them to the speediest and least painful death1 when it shall be necessary to deprive them of life40 ,but it is important to note that something more is due to animals1 and especially to domestic animals1 than the mere supply of provender and the mere immunity from ill-usage4 8,we owe justice to men10 wrote ,montaigne1 8and grace and benignity to other creatures that are capable of it2 there is a natural commerce and mutual obligation betwixt them and us40 ,sir ,arthur ,helps admirably expressed this sentiment in his well-known reference to the duty of 8using courtesy to animals40#bj ,if these be the rights of domestic animals1 it is pitiful to reflect how commonly and how grossly they are violated4 ,the average life of our 8beasts of burden10 the horse1 the ass1 and the mule1 is from beginning to end a rude negation of their individuality and intelligence2 they are habitually addressed and treated as stupid instruments of man's will and pleasure1 instead of the highly-organized and sensitive beings that they are4 ,well might ,thoreau1 the humanest and most observant of naturalists1 complain of man's 8not educating the horse1 not trying to develop his nature1 but merely getting work out of him02 for such1 it must be acknowledged1 is the prevalent method of treatment1 in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred1 at the present day1 even where there is no actual cruelty or ill-usage4 ,we are often told that there is no other western country where tame animals are so well treated as in ,england1 and it is only necessary to read the records of a century back to see that the inhumanities of the past were far more atrocious than any that are still practised in the present4 ,let us be thankful for these facts1 as showing that the current of ,english opinion is at least moving in the right direction4 ,but it must yet be said that the sights that everywhere meet the eye of a humane and thoughtful observer1 whether in town or country1 are a disgrace to our vaunted 8civilization40 ,watch the cab traffic in one of the crowded thoroughfares of our great cities--always the same lugubrious patient procession of underfed overloaded animals1 the same brutal insolence of the drivers1 the same accursed sound of the whip4 ,and remembering that these horses are gifted with a large degree of sensibility and intelligence1 must one not feel that the fate to which they are thus mercilessly subjected is a shameful violation of the principle which moralists have laid down8 ,yet it is to this fate that even the well-kept horses of the rich must in time descend1 so to pass the declining years of a life devoted to man's service6 8,a good man10 said ,plutarch1 8will take care of his horses and dogs1 not only while they are young1 but when old and past service4 ,we ought certainly not to treat living beings like shoes and household goods1 which1 when worn out with use1 we throw away40 ,such was the feeling of the old pagan writer1 and our good ,christians of the present age scarcely seem to have improved on it4 ,true1 they do not 8throw away0 their superannuated carriage-horses--it is so much more lucrative to sell them to the shopman or cab-proprietor1 who will in due course pass them on to the knacker and cat's-meat man4 ,the use of machinery is often condemned1 on sthetic grounds1 because of the ugliness it has introduced into so many features of modern life4 ,on the other hand1 it should not be forgotten that it has immensely relieved the huge mass of animal labour1 and that when such forces are generally used for purposes of traction1 one of the foulest blots on our social humanity is likely to disappear4 ,scientific and mechanical invention1 so far from being necessarily antagonistic to a true beauty of life1 may be found to be of the utmost service to it1 when they are employed for humane and not merely commercial1 purposes4#ba ,herein ,thoreau is a wiser teacher than ,ruskin4 8,if all were as it seems10 he says1 8and men made the elements their servants for noble ends6 ,if the cloud that hangs over the engine were the perspiration of heroic deeds1 or as beneficent as that which floats over the farmer's fields1 then the elements and ,nature herself would cheerfully accompany men on their errands and be their escort40 ,it is no part of my purpose to enumerate the various acts of injustice of which domestic animals are the victims2 it is sufficient to point out that the true cause of such injustice is to be sought in the unwarrantable neglect of their many intelligent qualities1 and in the contemptuous indifference which1 in defiance of sense and reason1 still classes them as 8brute-beasts40 ,what has been said of horses in this respect applies still more strongly to the second class of domestic animals4 ,sheep1 goats1 and oxen are regarded as mere 8live-stock02 while pigs1 poultry1 rabbits1 and other marketable 8farm-produce10 meet with even less consideration1 and are constantly treated with brutal inhumanity by their human possessors4 ,let anyone who doubts this pay a visit to a cattle-market1 and study the scenes that are enacted there4 ,the question of the castration of animals may here be briefly referred to4#bb ,that nothing but imperative necessity could justify such a practice must1 ,i think1 be admitted2 for mutilation of this kind is not only painful in itself1 but deprives those who undergo it of the most vigorous and spirited elements of their character4 ,it is said--with what precise amount of truth ,i cannot pretend to determine--that man would not otherwise be able to maintain his dominion over the domestic animals2 but on the other hand it may be pointed out that this dominion is in no case destined to be perpetuated in its present sharply-accentuated form1 and that various practices which1 in a sense1 are 8necessary0 now1--i4e4 in the false position and relationship in which we stand towards the animals1--will doubtless be gradually discontinued under the humaner system of the future4 ,moreover1 castration as performed on cattle1 sheep1 pigs1 and fowls1 with no better object than to increase their size and improve their flavour for the table1 is1 even at the present time1 utterly needless and unjustifiable4 8,the bull10 as ,shelley says1 8must be degraded into the ox1 and the ram into the wether1 by an unnatural and inhuman operation1 that the flaccid fibre may offer a fainter resistance to rebellious nature40 ,in all its aspects1 this is a disagreeable subject1 and one about which the majority of people do not care to think--probably from an unconscious perception that the established custom could scarcely survive the critical ordeal of thought4 ,there remains one other class of domestic animals1 viz41 those who have become still more closely associated with mankind through being the inmates of their homes4 ,the dog is probably better treated on the whole than any other animal2#bc though1 to prove how far we still are from a rational and consistent appreciation of his worth1 it is only necessary to point to the fact that he is commonly regarded by a large number of educated people as a fit and proper subject for that experimental torture which is known as vivisection4 ,the cat has always been treated with far less consideration than the dog1 and1 despite the numerous scattered instances that might be cited to the contrary1 it is to be feared that ,de ,quincey was in the main correct1 when he remarked that 8the groans and screams of this poor persecuted race1 if gathered into some great echoing hall of horrors1 would melt the heart of the stoniest40 ,the institution of 8,homes0 for lost and starving dogs and cats is a welcome sign of the humane feeling that is asserting itself in some quarters2 but it is also no less a proof of the general indifferentism which can allow the most familiar domestic animals to become homeless4 ,it may be doubted1 indeed1 whether the condition of the household 8pet0 is1 in the long run1 more enviable than that of the 8beast of burden40 ,pets1 like kings' favourites1 are usually the recipients of an abundance of sentimental affection but of little real kindness2 so much easier is it to give temporary caresses than substantial justice4 ,it seems to be forgotten1 in a vast majority of cases1 that a domestic animal does not exist for the mere idle amusement1 any more than for the mere commercial profit1 of its human owner2 and that for a living being to be turned into a useless puppet is only one degree better than to be doomed to the servitude of a drudge4 ,the injustice done to the pampered lap-dog is as conspicuous1 in its way1 as that done to the over-worked horse1 and both spring from one and the same origin--the fixed belief that the life of a 8brute0 has no moral purpose1 no distinctive personality worthy of due consideration and development4 ,in a society where the lower animals were regarded as intelligent beings1 and not as animated machines1 it would be impossible for this incongruous absurdity to continue4 ,this1 then1 appears to be our position as regards the rights of domestic animals4 ,waiving1 on the one hand1 the somewhat abstruse question whether man is morally justified in utilizing animal labour at all1 and on the other the fatuous assertion that he is constituting himself a benefactor by so doing1 we recognize that the services of domestic animals have by immemorial usage become an important and1 it may even be said1 necessary element in the economy of modern life4 ,it is impossible1 unless every principle of justice is to be cast to the winds1 that the due requital of these services should remain a matter of personal caprice2 for slavery is at all times hateful and iniquitous1 whether it be imposed on mankind or on the lower races4 ,apart from the rights they possess in common with all intelligent beings1 domestic animals have a special claim on man's courtesy and sense of fairness1 inasmuch as they are not his fellow-creatures only1 but his fellow-workers1 his dependents1 and in many cases the familiar associates and trusted inmates of his home4 ,,chapter ,,iii4 ,,the ,,case ,,of ,,wild ,,animals4 ,that wild animals1 no less than domestic animals1 have their rights1 albeit of a less positive character and far less easy to define1 is an essential point which follows directly from the acceptance of the general principle of a jus animalium4 ,it is of the utmost importance to emphasize the fact that1 whatever the legal fiction may have been1 or may still be1 the rights of animals are not morally dependent on the so-called rights of property4 ,the domination of property has left its trail indelibly on the records of this question4 ,until the passing of 8,martin's ,act0 in #ahbb1 the most atrocious cruelty1 even to domestic animals1 could only be punished where there was proved to be an infringement of the rights of ownership4 ,some measure of legal protection was1 as ,i have said1 accorded to wild animals in the ,wild ,animals in ,captivity ,act of #aijj1 which was repealed1 re-enacted1 and extended in the ,protection of ,animals ,act1 #aiaa2 which ,act was itself strengthened by an ,amendment passed in #aiba1 prohibiting the coursing or hunting of a wild animal in an enclosed space from which it has no reasonable chance of escape4 ,with this exception1 it is permissible for anyone to kill or torture them with impunity1 except where the sacred privileges of 8property0 are thereby offended4 8,everywhere10 it has been well said1 8it is absolutely a capital crime to be an unowned creature40 ,yet surely an unowned creature has the same right as another to live his life unmolested and uninjured except when this is in some way inimical to human welfare4 ,we are justified by the strongest of all instincts1 that of self-defence1 in safe-guarding ourselves against such a multiplication of any species of animal as might imperil the established supremacy of man2 but we are not justified in unnecessarily killing--still less in torturing--any harmless being whatsoever4 ,in this respect the position of wild animals1 in their relation to man1 is somewhat analogous to that of the uncivilized towards the civilized nations4 ,nothing is more difficult than to determine precisely to what extent it is morally permissible to interfere with the autonomy of savage tribes--an interference which seems in some cases to conduce to the general progress of the race1 in others to foster the worst forms of cruelty and injustice2 but it is beyond question that savages1 like other people1 have the right to be exempt from all wanton insult and degradation4 ,in the same way1 while admitting that man is justified1 by the exigencies of his own destiny1 in asserting his supremacy over the wild animals1 we must deny him any right to turn his protectorate into a tyranny1 or to inflict one atom more of subjection and pain than is absolutely unavoidable4 ,to take advantage of the sufferings of animals1 whether wild or tame1 for the gratification of sport1 or gluttony1 or fashion1 is quite incompatible with any possible assertion of animals' rights4 ,we may kill1 if necessary1 but never torture or degrade4 8,the laws of self-defence10 says an old writer1#bd 8undoubtedly justify us in destroying those animals who would destroy us1 who injure our properties or annoy our persons2 but not even these1 whenever their situation incapacitates them from hurting us4 ,i know of no right which we have to shoot a bear on an inaccessible island of ice1 or an eagle on the mountain's top1 whose lives cannot injure us1 nor deaths procure us any benefit4 ,we are unable to give life1 and therefore ought not to take it away from the meanest insect without sufficient reason40 ,i reserve1 for fuller consideration in subsequent chapters1 certain problems which are suggested by the wholesale slaughter of wild animals by the huntsman or the trapper1 for purposes which are loosely supposed to be inevitable4 ,meantime a word must be said about the condition of those tamed or caged animals which1 though wild by nature1 and not bred in captivity1 are yet to a certain extent 8domesticated0--a class which stands midway between the true domestic and the wild4 ,is the imprisonment of such animals a violation of the principle we have laid down8 ,in most cases ,i fear this question can only be answered in the affirmative4 ,and here1 once more ,i must protest against the common assumption that these captive animals are laid under an obligation to man by the very fact of their captivity1 and that therefore no complaint can be made on the score of their loss of freedom and the many miseries involved therein6 ,it is extraordinary that even humane thinkers and earnest champions of animals' rights should permit themselves to be misled by this most fallacious and flimsy line of argument4 8,harmful animals10 says one of these writers1#be 8and animals with whom man has to struggle for the fruits of the earth1 may of course be so shut up3 they gain by it1 for otherwise they would not have been let live40 ,and so in like manner it is sometimes contended that a menagerie is a sort of paradise for wild beasts1 whose loss of liberty is more than compensated by the absence of the constant apprehension and insecurity which1 it is conveniently assumed1 weigh so heavily on their spirits4 ,but all this notion of their 8gaining by it0 is in truth nothing more than a mere arbitrary supposition2 for1 in the first place1 a speedy death may1 for all we know1 be very preferable to a protracted death-in-life2 while1 secondly1 the pretence that wild animals enjoy captivity is even more absurd than the episcopal contention that the life of a domestic animal is 8one of very great comfort1 according to the animal's own standard40 ,to take a wild animal from its free natural state1 full of abounding egoism and vitality1 and to shut it up for the wretched remainder of its life in a cell where it has just space to turn round1 and where it necessarily loses every distinctive feature of its character--this appears to me to be as downright a denial as could well be imagined of the theory of animals' rights4 ,nor is there much force in the plea founded on the alleged scientific value of these zoological institutions1 at any rate in the case of the wilder and less tractable animals1 for it cannot be maintained that the establishment of wild-beast shows is in any way necessary for the advancement of human knowledge4 ,for what do the good people see1 who go to the gardens on a half-holiday afternoon to poke their umbrellas at a blinking eagle-owl1 or to throw dog-biscuits down the expansive throat of a hippopotamus8 ,not wild beasts or wild birds certainly1 for there never have been or can be such in the best of all possible menageries1 but merely the outer semblances and simulacra of the denizens of forest and prairie--poor spiritless remnants of what were formerly wild animals4 ,to kill and stuff these victims of our morbid curiosity1 instead of immuring them in lifelong imprisonment1 would be at once a humaner and a cheaper method1 and could not possibly be of less use to science4#bf ,but of course these remarks do not apply1 with anything like the same force1 to the taming of such wild animals as are readily domesticated in captivity1 or trained by man to some intelligible and practical purpose4 ,for example1 though we may look forward to the time when it will not be deemed necessary to convert wild elephants into beasts of burden1 it must be acknowledged that the exaction of such service1 however questionable in itself1 is very different from condemning an animal to a long term of useless and deadening imbecility4 ,there can be no absolute standard of morals in these matters1 whether it be human liberty or animal liberty that is at stake2 ,i merely contend that it is as incumbent on us to show good reason for curtailing the one as the other4 ,this would be at once recognized1 but for the prevalent habit of regarding the lower animals as devoid of purpose and individuality4 ,the caging of wild song-birds is another practice which deserves the strongest reprobation4 ,it is often pleaded that the amusement given by these unfortunate prisoners to the still more unfortunate human prisoners of the sick-room1 or the smoky city1 is a justification of their sacrifice2 but surely such excuses rest only on habit--habitual inability or unwillingness to look facts in the face4 ,few invalids1 ,i fancy1 would be greatly cheered by the captive life that hangs at their window1 if they had fully considered how blighted and sterilized a life it must be4 ,the bird-catcher's trade and the bird-catcher's shop are alike full of horrors1 and they are horrors which are due entirely to a silly fashion and a habit of callous thoughtlessness1 not on the part of the ruffianly bird-catcher 7ruffianly enough1 too often7 who has to bear the burden of the odium attaching to these cruelties1 but of the respectable customers who buy captured larks and linnets without the smallest scruple or consideration4 ,finally1 let me point out that if we desire to cultivate a closer intimacy with the wild animals1 it must be an intimacy based on a genuine love for them as living beings and fellow-creatures1 not on the superior power or cunning by which we can drag them from their native haunts1 warp the whole purpose of their lives1 and degrade them to the level of pets1 or curiosities1 or captives4 ,the sanctuaries which the parks of some large towns now afford to birds1 squirrels1 etc41 suggest what our relations with wild animals might be1 under more humane conditions4 ,of all uses to which animals can be put--and this applies to the domesticated as well as to the wild--the silliest1 perhaps1 is that of training them to 8perform40 ,the true interest of animal life lies in its naturalness2 and to see a dog1 or horse1 or lion performing a 8trick0 is a sight which ought to cause disgust rather than pleasure in any rational mind1 especially as the process of training in most1 if not in all cases1 involves the practice of cruelty4 ,humane persons should discountenance every sort of entertainment in which animals are introduced1 from the dancing bear in the village to the more elaborate but not less idiotic performances on the stage4 ,many of them are cruel2 all of them are stupid2 most of them are both4 ,,chapter ,,iv4 ,,the ,,slaughter ,,of ,,animals ,,for ,,food4 ,it is impossible that any discussion of the principle of animals' rights can be at all adequate or conclusive which ignores1 as many so-called humanitarians still ignore1 the immense underlying importance of the food question4 ,the origin of the habit of flesh-eating need not greatly concern us2 let us assume1 in accordance with the most favoured theory1 that animals were first slaughtered by the uncivilized migratory tribes under the stress of want1 and that the practice thus engendered1 being fostered by the religious idea of blood-offering and propitiation1 survived and increased after the early conditions which produced it had passed away4 ,what is more important to note1 is that the very prevalence of the habit has caused it to be regarded as a necessary feature of modern civilization1 and that this view has inevitably had a marked effect1 and a very detrimental effect1 on the study of man's moral relation to the lower animals4 ,now it must be admitted1 ,i think1 that it is a difficult thing consistently to recognize or assert the rights of an animal on whom you purpose to make a meal1 a difficulty which has not been at all satisfactorily surmounted by those moralists who1 while accepting the practice of flesh-eating as an institution which is itself beyond cavil1 have nevertheless been anxious to find some solid basis for a theory of humaneness4 8,strange contrariety of conduct10 says ,goldsmith's 8,chinese ,philosopher10 in commenting on this dilemma2 8they pity1 and they eat the objects of their compassion60 ,there is also the further consideration that the sanction implicitly given to the terrible cruelties inflicted on harmless cattle by the drover and the slaughterman render it1 by parity of reasoning1 wellnigh impossible to abolish many other acts of injustice that we see everywhere around us2 and this obstacle the opponents of humanitarian reform have not been slow to utilize4 ,hence a disposition on the part of many humane writers to fight shy of the awkward subject of the slaughter-house1 or to gloss it over with a series of contradictory and quite irrelevant excuses4 ,let me give a few examples4 8,we deprive animals of life10 says ,bentham1 in a delightfully nave application of the utilitarian philosophy1 8and this is justifiable2 their pains do not equal our enjoyments40 8,by the scheme of universal providence10 says ,lawrence1 8the services between man and beast are intended to be reciprocal1 and the greater part of the latter can by no other means requite human labour and care than by the forfeiture of life40 ,schopenhauer's plea is somewhat similar to the foregoing3 8,man deprived of all flesh-food1 especially in the north1 would suffer more than the animal suffers in a swift and unforeseen death2 still we ought to mitigate it by the help of chloroform40 ,then there is the argument so frequently founded on the supposed sanction of ,nature4 8,my scruples10 wrote ,lord ,chesterfield1 8remained unreconciled to the committing of so horrid a meal1 till upon serious reflection ,i became convinced of its legality from the general order of ,nature1 which has instituted the universal preying upon the weaker as one of her first principles40 ,finally1 we find the redoubtable ,paley discarding as valueless the whole appeal to ,nature1 and relying on the ordinances of ,holy ,writ4 8,a right to the flesh of animals4 ,some excuse seems necessary for the pain and loss which we occasion to animals by restraining them of their liberty1 mutilating their bodies1 and at last putting an end to their lives for our pleasure or convenience4 ,the reasons alleged in vindication of this practice are the following3 that the several species of animals being created to prey upon one another affords a kind of analogy to prove that the human species were intended to feed upon them4444 ,upon which reason ,i would observe that the analogy contended for is extremely lame1 since animals have no power to support life by any other means1 and since we have1 for the whole human species might subsist entirely upon fruit1 pulse1 herbs1 and roots1 as many tribes of ,hindus actually do4444 ,it seems to me that it would be difficult to defend this right by any arguments which the light and order of ,nature afford1 and that we are beholden for it to the permission recorded in ,scripture40 ,it is evident from the above quotations1 which might be indefinitely extended1 that the fable of the ,wolf and the ,lamb is constantly repeating itself in the attitude of our moralists and philosophers towards the victims of the slaughter-house4 ,far wiser and humaner1 on this particular subject1 is the tone adopted by such writers as ,michelet1 who1 while not seeing any way of escape from the practice of flesh-eating1 at least refrain from attempting to support it by fallacious reasonings4 8,the animals below us have also their rights before ,god4 ,animal life1 sombre mystery6 ,immense world of thoughts and of dumb sufferings6 ,all nature protests against the barbarity of man1 who misapprehends1 who humiliates1 who tortures his inferior brethren4444 ,life--death6 ,the daily murder which feeding upon animals implies--those hard and bitter problems sternly placed themselves before my mind4 ,miserable contradiction6 ,let us hope that there may be another globe in which the base1 the cruel fatalities of this may be spared to us40#bg ,meantime1 however1 the simple fact remains true1 and is every year finding more and more scientific corroboration1 that there is no such 8cruel fatality0 as that which ,michelet imagined4 ,comparative anatomy has shown that man is not carnivorous1 but frugivorous1 in his natural structure2 experience has shown that flesh-food is wholly unnecessary for the support of healthy life4 ,the importance of this more general recognition of a truth which has in all ages been familiar to a few enlightened thinkers1 can hardly be over-estimated in its bearing on the question of animals' rights4 ,it clears away a difficulty which has long damped the enthusiasm1 or warped the judgment of the humaner school of ,european moralists1 and makes it possible to approach the subject of man's moral relation to the lower animals in a more candid and fearless spirit of enquiry4 ,it is no part of my present purpose to advocate the cause of vegetarianism2 but in view of the mass of evidence1 readily obtainable1 that the transit and slaughter of animals are necessarily attended by most atrocious cruelties1 and that a large number of persons have for years been living healthily without the use of flesh-meat1 it must at least be said that to omit this branch of the subject from the most earnest and strenuous consideration is playing with the question of animals' rights4 ,fifty or a hundred years ago1 there was perhaps some excuse for supposing that vegetarianism was a mere fad2 there is absolutely no such excuse at the present time4 ,there are two points of especial significance in this connection4 ,first1 that as civilization advances1 the cruelties inseparable from the slaughtering system have been aggravated rather than diminished1 owing both to the increased necessity of transporting animals long distances by sea and land1 under conditions of hurry and hardship which generally preclude any sort of humane regard for their comfort1 and to the clumsy and barbarous methods of slaughtering too often practised in those ill-constructed dens of torment known as 8private slaughter-houses40#bh ,secondly1 that the feeling of repugnance caused among all people of sensibility and refinement by the sight1 or mention1 or even thought1 of the business of the butcher is also largely on the increase2 so that the details of the revolting process are1 as far as possible1 kept carefully out of sight and out of mind1 being delegated to a pariah class who do the work which most educated persons would shrink from doing for themselves4 ,in these two facts we have clear evidence1 first that there is good reason why the public conscience1 or at any rate the humanitarian conscience1 should be uneasy concerning the slaughter of 8live-stock10 and secondly that this uneasiness is already to a large extent developed and manifested4 ,the common argument1 adopted by many apologists of flesh-eating1 as of fox-hunting1 that the pain inflicted by the death of the animals is more than compensated by the pleasure enjoyed by them in their life-time1 since otherwise they would not have been brought into existence at all1 is ingenious rather than convincing1 being indeed none other than the old familiar fallacy already commented on--the arbitrary trick of constituting ourselves the spokesmen and the interpreters of our victims4 ,mr4 ,e4 ,b4 ,nicholson1 for example1 is of opinion that 8we may pretty safely take it that if he the fox were able to understand and answer the question1 he would choose life1 with all its pains and risks1 to non-existence without them40#bi ,unfortunately for the soundness of this suspiciously partial assumption1 there is no recorded instance of this strange alternative having ever been submitted either to fox or philosopher2 so that a precedent has yet to be established on which to found a judgment4 ,meantime1 instead of committing the gross absurdity of talking of non-existence as a state which is good1 or bad1 or in any way comparable to existence1 we might do well to remember that animals' rights1 if we admit them at all1 must begin with the birth1 and can only end with the death1 of the animals in question1 and that we cannot evade our just responsibilities by any such quibbling references to an imaginary ante-natal choice in an imaginary ante-natal condition4 ,the most mischievous effect of the practice of flesh-eating1 in its influence on the study of animals' rights at the present time1 is that it so stultifies and debases the very raison d'tre of countless myriads of beings--it brings them into life for no better purpose than to deny their right to live4 ,it is idle to appeal to the internecine warfare that we see in some aspects of wild nature1 where the weaker animal is often the prey of the stronger1 for there 7apart from the fact that co-operation largely modifies competition7 the weaker races at least live their own lives and take their chance in the game1 whereas the victims of the human carnivora are bred1 and fed1 and from the first pre-destined to untimely slaughter1 so that their whole mode of living is warped from its natural standard1 and they are scarcely more than animated beef or mutton or pork4 ,it has been well said that 8to keep a man 7slave or servant7 for your own advantage merely1 to keep an animal that you may eat it1 is a lie4 ,you cannot look that man or animal in the face40#cj ,vegetarianism1 then1 is the ideal towards which food-reformers must strive2 and in the meantime something may be done by the improvement of methods of slaughtering4 ,the advantages of the public over the private slaughter-house have repeatedly been demonstrated1 as1 for example1 in the ,report of the ,tuberculosis ,commission of #ahih1 and in the ,report of the ,commission appointed by the ,admiralty 8to consider the humane slaughtering of animals10 issued in #aijd4 ,anyone who will compare the blundering1 haphazard methods of many ,english slaughter-houses with the model abattoirs of ,germany1 ,switzerland1 and other ,continental ,states1 will at once see the pressing need of such reforms on the score of humanity4 ,the butchers' objections to the abattoir system arise from the usual trade prejudices1 and from the fear that their interests would suffer2 but private interests1 real or imagined1 should not be allowed to stand in the way of a reform which would in the long run benefit all classes of the community--not least the unhappy victims of the shambles4 ,one thing is certain1 that if all flesh-eaters could themselves see what goes on behind the scenes in many private slaughter-houses1 an end would soon be put to a system which is as barbarous as it is insanitary--a fruitful cause of cruelty to the animals and of danger to the public4 ,reform of diet will doubtless be slow1 and attended in many individual cases with its difficulties and drawbacks4 ,but at least we may lay down this much as incumbent on all humanitarian thinkers--that everyone must satisfy himself of the necessity1 the real necessity1 of the use of flesh-food1 before he comes to any conclusion on the subject of animals' rights4 ,it is easy to see that1 as the question is more and more discussed1 the result will be more and more decisive4 8,whatever my own practice may be10 wrote ,thoreau1 8,i have no doubt that it is a part of the destiny of the human race1 in its gradual improvement1 to leave off eating animals1 as surely as the savage tribes have left off eating each other when they came in contact with the more civilized40 ,,chapter ,v4 ,,sport1 ,,or ,,amateur ,,butchery4 ,that particular form of recreation which is euphemistically known as 8sport0 has a close historical connection with the practice of flesh-eating1 inasmuch as the hunter was in old times what the butcher is now1--the 8purveyor0 on whom the family was dependent for its daily supply of victuals4 ,modern sport1 however1 as usually carried on in civilized ,european countries1 has degenerated into what has been well described as 8amateur butchery10 a system under which the slaughter of certain kinds of animals is practised less as a necessity than as a means of amusement and diversion4 ,just as the youthful nobles1 during the savage scenes and reprisals of the ,huguenot wars1 used to seize the opportunity of exercising their swordsmanship1 and perfecting themselves in the art of dealing graceful death-blows1 so the modern sportsman converts the killing of animals from a prosaic and perhaps distasteful business into an agreeable and gentlemanly pastime4 ,now1 on the very face of it1 this amateur butchery is1 in one sense1 the most wanton and indefensible of all possible violations of the principle of animals' rights4 ,if animals--or men1 for that matter--have of necessity to be killed1 let them be killed accordingly2 but to seek one's own amusement out of the death-pangs of other beings1 this is saddening stupidity indeed6 ,wisely did ,wordsworth inculcate as the moral of his 8,hartleap ,well10 8,never to blend our pleasure or our pride ,with sorrow of the meanest thing that feels40 ,but the sporting instinct is due to sheer callousness and insensibility2 the sportsman1 by force of habit1 or by force of hereditary influence1 cannot understand or sympathize with the sufferings he causes1 and being1 in the great majority of instances1 a man of slow perception1 he naturally finds it much easier to follow the hounds than to follow an argument4 ,and here1 in his chief blame1 lies also his chief excuse2 for it may be said of him1 as it cannot be said of certain other tormentors1 that he really does not comprehend the import of what he is doing4 ,whether this ultimately makes his position better or worse1 is a point for the casuist to decide4 ,that 8it would have to be killed anyhow0 is a truly deplorable reason for torturing any animal whatsoever2 it is an argument which would equally have justified the worst barbarities of the ,roman amphitheatre4 ,to exterminate wolves1 and other dangerous species1 may indeed1 at certain places and times1 be necessary and justifiable enough4 ,but the sportsman nowadays will not even perform this practical service of exterminating such animals--the fox1 for example--as are noxious to the general interests of the community2 on the contrary1 he 8preserves0 them 7note the unintended humour of the term671 and then1 by a happy afterthought1 claims the gratitude of the animals themselves for his humane and benevolent interposition4#ca ,in plain words1 he first undertakes to rid the country of a pest1 and then1 finding the process an enjoyable one to himself1 he contrives that it shall never be brought to a conclusion4 ,prometheus had precisely as much reason to be grateful to the vulture for eternally gnawing at his liver1 as have the hunted animals to thank the predaceous sportsmen who 8preserve0 them4 ,let me once more enter a protest against the canting ,pharisaism which is afraid to take the just responsibility of its own selfish pleasure-seeking4 8,what name should we bestow10 said a humane essayist of the eighteenth century1#cb 8on a superior being who1 without provocation or advantage1 should continue from day to day1 void of all pity and remorse1 to torment mankind for diversion1 and at the same time endeavour with the utmost care to preserve their lives and to promulgate their species1 in order to increase the number of victims devoted to his malevolence1 and be delighted in proportion to the miseries which he occasioned8 ,i say1 what name detestable enough could we find for such a being8 ,yet1 if we impartially consider the case1 and our intermediate situation1 we must acknowledge that1 with regard to the inferior animals1 just such a being is the sportsman40 ,the excuses alleged in favour of ,english blood-sports in general1 and of hunting in particular1 are for the most part as irrelevant as they are unreasonable4 ,it is often said that the manliness of our national character would be injuriously affected by the discontinuance of these sports--a strange argument1 when one considers the very unequal1 and therefore unmanly1 conditions of the strife4 ,but1 apart from this consideration1 what right can we possess to cultivate these personal qualities at the expense of unspeakable suffering to the lower races8 ,such actions may be pardonable in a savage1 or in a schoolboy in whom the savage nature still largely predominates1 but they are wholly unworthy of a civilized and rational man4 ,as for the nonsense sometimes talked about the beneficial effects of those field-sports which bring men into contact with the sublimities of nature1 the dynamiters who used to cross the ocean to blow up an ,english town might on this principle have justified the object of their journey by the assertion that the sea-voyage brought them in contact with the exalting and ennobling influence of the ,atlantic4#cc ,as the case stands between the sportsman and his victims1 there cannot be much doubt as to whence the benefits proceed1 and from which party the gratitude is due4 8,woe to the ungrateful60 says ,michelet4 8,by this phrase ,i mean the sporting crowd1 who1 unmindful of the numerous benefits we owe to the animals1 exterminate innocent life4 ,a terrible sentence weighs on the tribes of sportsmen--they can create nothing4 ,they originate no art1 no industry4444 ,it is a shocking and hideous thing to see a child partial to sport2 to see woman enjoying and admiring murder1 and encouraging her child4 ,that delicate and sensitive woman would not give him a knife1 but she gives him a gun40 ,the sports of hunting and coursing are a brutality which could not be tolerated for a day in a state which possessed anything more than the mere name of justice1 freedom1 and enlightenment4 ,sir ,thomas ,more says of his model citizens in 8,utopia30 8,nor can they comprehend the pleasure of seeing dogs run after a hare more than of seeing one dog run after another2 for if the seeing them run is that which gives the pleasure1 you have the same entertainment to the eye on both these occasions1 since that is the same in both cases2 but if the pleasure lies in seeing the hare killed and torn by the dogs1 this ought rather to stir pity1 that a weak1 harmless1 and fearful hare should be devoured by strong1 fierce1 and cruel dogs40 ,to be accurate1 the zest of sport lies neither in the running nor the killing1 as such1 but in the excitement caused by the fact that a life 7some one else's life7 is at stake1 that the pursuer is matched in a fierce game of hazard against the pursued4 ,the opinion has been expressed1 by one well qualified to speak with authority on the subject1 that 8well-laid drags1 tracked by experts1 would test the mettle both of hounds and riders to hounds2 but then a terrified1 palpitating1 fleeing life would not be struggling ahead1 and so the idea is not pleasing to those who find pleasure in blood40#cd ,the case is even worse when the quarry is to all intents and purposes domesticated1 an animal wild by nature1 but by force of circumstances and surroundings tame4 ,such are the park deer1 the victims of the sportsmen who persist in carrying on the carted stag hunt1 in spite of the abolition of the ,royal ,buckhounds in #aija4 ,there is urgent need that the laws which relate to the humane treatment of animals should be amended1 or more wisely interpreted1 on this particular point1 so as to afford immediate protection to these domesticated stags1 whose torture1 under the name and sanction of 8sport10 has been long condemned by the public conscience4 ,bear-baiting and cock-fighting have now been abolished by legal enactment1 and it is high time that the equally demoralizing sport of hunting of tame stags should be relegated to the same category4#ce ,the same must be said of some sports which are practised by the ,english working man--rabbit-coursing1 in particular1 that half-holiday diversion which is so popular in many villages of the ,north4 ,an attempt is often made by the apologists of amateur butchery to play off one class against another in the discussion of this question4 ,they protest1 on the one hand1 against any interference with aristocratic sport1 on the plea that working men are no less addicted to such pastimes2 and1 on the other hand1 a cry is raised against the unfairness of restricting the amusements of the poor1 while noble lords and ladies are permitted to hunt the carted stag with impunity4 ,the obvious answer to these quibbling excuses is that all such barbarities1 whether practised by rich or poor1 are alike condemned by any conceivable principle of justice and humaneness2 and1 further1 that it is a doubtful compliment to working men to suggest that they have nothing better to do in their spare hours than to torture defenceless rabbits4 ,it was long ago remarked by ,martin1 the author of the famous ,act of #ahbb1 that such an argument indicates at bottom a contempt rather than regard for the working-classes2 it is as much as to say1 8,poor creatures1 let them alone--they have few amusements--let them enjoy them40 ,nothing can be more shocking than the treatment commonly accorded to rabbits1 rats1 and other small animals1 on the plea that they are 8vermin10 and therefore1 it is tacitly assumed1 outside the pale of humanity and justice2 we have here another instance of the way in which the application of a contemptuous name may aggravate and increase the actual tendency to barbarous ill-usage4 ,how many a demoralizing spectacle1 especially where the young are concerned1 is witnessed when 8fun0 is made out of the death and torture of 8vermin06 ,how horrible is the practice1 apparently universal throughout all country districts1 of setting steel traps along the ditches and hedgerows1 in which the victims are frequently left to linger1 in an agony of pain and apprehension1 for hours1 or even days6 ,yet there are no means of redressing these barbarities1 because the laws1 such as they are1 which prohibit cruelty to animals1 are not designed to take any cognizance of 8vermin40 ,all that has been said of hunting and coursing is applicable also--in a less degree1 perhaps1 but on exactly the same principle--to the sports of shooting and fishing4 ,let me quote a striking testimony to the wickedness and injustice of sport1 as exhibited in one of its most refined and fashionable forms1 the 8cult of the pheasant40#cf 8,for what is it but the deliberate massacre in cold blood every year of thousands and tens of thousands of tame1 hand-reared birds who are literally driven into the jaws of death and mown down in a peculiarly brutal manner8444 ,a perfect roar of guns fills the air1 louder tap and yell the beaters1 above the din can be heard the heart-rending cries of wounded hares and rabbits1 some of which can be seen dragging themselves away1 with both hind legs broken1 or turning round and round in their agony before they die4 ,and the pheasants6 ,they are on every side1 some rising1 some dropping1 some lying dead1 but the greater majority fluttering on the ground wounded1 some with both legs broken and a wing1 some with both wings broken and a leg1 others merely winged1 running to hide1 others mortally wounded gasping out their last breath of life amidst the fiendish sounds which surround them4 ,and this is called sport6444 ,sport in every form and kind is horrible1 from the rich man's hare-coursing to the poor man's rabbit-coursing4 ,all show the #8tiger' that lives in our natures1 and which nothing but a higher civilization will eradicate40 ,it does not in the least matter1 so far as the question of animals' rights is concerned1 whether you run your victim to death with a pack of yelping hounds1 or shoot him with a gun1 or drag him from his native waters by a hook2 the point at issue is simply whether man is justified in inflicting any form of death or suffering on the lower races for his mere amusement and caprice4 ,there can be little doubt what answer must be given to this question4 ,,chapter ,,vi4 ,,murderous ,,millinery4 ,we have seen what a vast amount of quite preventable suffering is caused through the agency of the slaughterman who kills for a business1 and of the sportsman who kills for a pastime1 the victims in either case being regarded as mere irrational automata1 with no higher destiny than to satisfy the most artificial wants or the most cruel caprices of mankind4 ,a few words must now be said about the fur and feather traffic--the slaughter of mammals and birds for human clothing or human ornamentation--a subject connected on the one hand with that of flesh-eating1 and on the other1 though to a less degree1 with that of sport4 ,what ,i shall say will of course have no reference to wool1 or any other substance which is obtainable without injury to the animal from whom it is taken4 ,it is evident that in this case1 as in the butchering trade1 the responsibility for whatever wrongs are done must rest ultimately on the class which demands an unnecessary commodity1 rather than on that which is compelled by economic pressure to supply it2 it is not the man who kills the bird1 but the lady who wears the feathers in her hat1 who is the true offender4 ,but here it will be asked1 is the use of furs and feathers unnecessary8 ,now of course if we consider solely the present needs and tastes of society1 in regard to these matters1 it must be admitted that a sudden1 unexpected withdrawal of the numberless animal products on which our 8civilization0 depends would be a very serious embarrassment2 the world1 as alarmists point out to us1 might have to go to bed without candles1 and wake up to find itself without boots4 ,it must be remembered1 however1 that such changes do not come about with suddenness1 but1 on the contrary1 with the extremest slowness imaginable2 and a little thought will suggest1 what experience has already in many cases confirmed1 that there is really no indispensable animal substance for which a substitute cannot be provided1 when once there is sufficient demand1 from the vegetable or mineral kingdom4 ,take the case of leather1 for instance1 a material which is in almost universal use1 and may1 under present circumstances1 be fairly described as a necessary4 ,what should we do without leather8 was1 in fact1 a question very frequently asked of vegetarians during the early and callow years of the food-reform movement1 until it was found that vegetable leather could be successfully employed in boot-making1 and that the inconsistency of which vegetarians at present stand convicted is only a temporary and incidental one4 ,now of course so long as oxen are slaughtered for food1 their skins will be utilized in this way2 but it is not difficult to foresee that the gradual discontinuance of the habit of flesh-eating will lead to a similar gradual discontinuance of the use of hides1 and that human ingenuity will not be at a loss in the provision of a substitute4 ,so that it does not follow that a commodity which1 in the immediate sense1 is necessary now1 would be absolutely or permanently necessary1 under different conditions1 in the future4 ,my sole reason for dwelling on this typical point is that ,i wish to guard myself1 by anticipation1 against a very plausible argument1 by which discredit is often cast on the whole theory of animals' rights4 ,what can be the object1 it is said1 of entering on the sentimental path of an impossible humanitarianism1 which only leads into insurmountable difficulties and dilemmas1 inasmuch as the use of these various animal substances is so interwoven with the whole system of society that it can never be discontinued until society itself comes to an end8 ,i assert that the case is by no means so desperate--that it is easy to make a right beginning now1 and to foresee the lines along which future progress will be effected4 ,much that is impossible in our own time may be realized1 by those who come after us1 as the natural and inevitable outcome of reforms which it now lies with us to inaugurate4 ,this said1 it may be freely admitted that1 at the outset1 humanitarians will do well to draw a practical distinction between such animal products as are converted to some genuine personal use1 and those which are supplied for no better object than to gratify the idle whims of luxury or fashion4 ,the when and the where are considerations of the greatest import in these questions4 ,there is a certain fitness in the hunter--himself the product of a rough1 wild era in human development--assuming the skins of the wild creatures he has conquered2 but it does not follow because an ,eskimo1 for example1 may appropriately wear fur1 or a ,red ,indian feathers1 that this apparel will be equally becoming to the inhabitants of ,london or ,new ,york2 on the contrary1 an act which is perfectly natural in the one case is often a sign of crass vulgarity in the other4 ,hercules1 clothed triumphant in the spoils of the ,nemean lion1 is a subject for painter and poet2 but what if he had purchased the skin1 ready dressed1 from a contemporary manufacturer8 ,what we must unhesitatingly condemn is the blind and reckless barbarism which has ransacked1 and is ransacking1 whole provinces and continents1 without a glimmer of suspicion that the birds and quadrupeds which it is rapidly exterminating have any other part or purpose in nature than to be sacrificed to human vanity1 that idle gentlemen and ladies may bedeck themselves1 like certain characters in the fable1 in borrowed skins and feathers4 ,what care they for all the beauty and tenderness and intelligence of the varied forms of animal life8 and what is it to them whether these be helped forward by man in the universal progress and evolution of all living things1 or whether whole species be transformed and degraded by the way--boiled down1 like the beaver1 into a hat1 or1 like the seal1 into a lady's jacket8 ,whatever it may be in other respects1 the fur trade1 in so far as it is a supply of ornamental clothing for those who are under no necessity of wearing fur at all1 is a barbarous and stupid business4 ,it makes patchwork1 one may say1 not only of the hides of its victims1 but of the conscience and intellect of its patrons4 ,a fur garment or trimming1 we are told1 appearing to the eye as if it were one uniform piece1 is generally made up of many curiously shaped fragments4 ,it is significant that a society which is enamoured of so many shams and fictions1 and which detests nothing so strongly as the need of looking facts in the face1 should pre-eminently esteem those articles of apparel which are constructed on the most deceptive and illusory principle4 ,the story of the ,ass in the ,lion's skin is capable1 it seems1 of a new and wider application4 ,cruel as is all hunting of animals for their fur1 there is a peculiar callousness in the seal 8fishery10 not only because the seal1 far from being a fish1 is one of the most sensitive of warm-blooded animals1 but because of the atrocious methods by which the practice of 8sealing0 has too often been pursued4 ,in all the history of man's dealings with the lower races1 there is no bloodier record than that of his treatment of the trustful and unresisting seal4 ,but if the fur trade gives cause for serious reflection1 what are we to say of the still more abominable trade in feathers8 ,murderous1 indeed1 is the millinery which finds its most fashionable ornament in the dead bodies of birds--birds1 the loveliest and most blithesome beings in ,nature6 ,it has been said that 8to enumerate all the feathers used for ornamental purposes would be practically to give a complete list of all known and obtainable birds40 ,the figures and details published by those humane writers who have raised an unavailing protest against this latest and worst crime of ,fashion are really appalling in their stern and naked record of unremitting cruelty4 8,one dealer in ,london is said to have received as a single consignment #cb1jjj dead humming-birds1 #hj1jjj aquatic birds1 and #hjj1jjj pairs of wings4 ,a ,parisian dealer had a contract for #dj1jjj birds1 and an army of murderers were turned out to supply the order4 ,no less than #dj1jjj terns have been sent from ,long ,island in one season for millinery purposes4 ,at one auction alone in ,london there were sold #djd1chi ,west ,indian and ,brazilian bird-skins1 and #cef1chi ,east ,indian1 besides thousands of pheasants and birds-of-paradise40 ,the meaning of such statistics is simply that the women of ,europe and ,america have given an order for the ruthless extermination of birds4 ,it is not seriously contended in any quarter that this wholesale destruction1 effected often in the most revolting and heartless manner1 is capable of excuse or justification2 yet the efforts of those who address themselves to the better feelings of the offenders appear to meet with little or no success4 ,the cause of this failure must undoubtedly be sought in the general lack of any clear conviction that animals have rights2 and the evil will never be thoroughly remedied until not only this particular abuse1 but all such abuses1 and the prime source from which such abuses originate1 have been subjected to an impartial criticism4#cg ,in saying this ,i do not of course mean to imply that special efforts should not be directed against special cruelties4 ,i have already remarked that the main responsibility for the daily murders which fashionable millinery is instigating must lie at the door of those who demand1 rather than those who supply1 these hideous and funereal ornaments4 ,unfortunately the process1 like that of slaughtering cattle1 is throughout delegated to other hands than those of the ultimate purchaser1 so that it is exceedingly difficult to bring home a due sense of blood-guiltiness to the right person4 ,the confirmed sportsman1 or amateur butcher1 at least sees with his own eyes the circumstances attendant on his 8sport02 and the fact that he feels no compunction in pursuing it is due1 in most cases1 to an obtuseness or confusion of the moral faculties4 ,but many of those who wear seal-skin mantles1 or feather-bedaubed bonnets are naturally humane enough2 they are misled by pure ignorance or thoughtlessness1 and would at once abandon such practices if they could be made aware of the methods employed in the wholesale massacre of seals or humming-birds4 ,still1 it remains true that all these questions ultimately hang together1 and that no complete solution will be found for any one of them until the whole problem of our moral relation towards the lower animals is studied with far greater comprehensiveness4 ,for this reason it is perhaps unscientific to assert that any particular form of cruelty to animals is worse than another form2 the truth is1 that each of these hydra-heads1 the offspring of one parent stem1 has its own proper characteristic1 and is different1 not worse or better than the rest4 ,to flesh-eating belongs the proud distinction of causing a greater bulk of animal suffering than any other habit whatsoever2 to sport1 the meed of unique and unparalleled brutality2 while the patrons of murderous millinery afford the most marvellous instance of the capacity the human mind possesses for ignoring its personal responsibilities4 ,to re-apply ,keats's words3 8,for them the ,ceylon diver held his breath1 ,and went all naked to the hungry shark2 ,for them his ears gush'd blood2 for them in death ,the seal on the cold ice with piteous bark ,lay full of darts2 for them alone did seethe ,a thousand men in troubles wide and dark2 ,half ignorant1 they turn'd an easy wheel1 ,that set sharp racks at work1 to pinch and peel40 ,,chapter ,,vii4 ,,experimental ,,torture4 ,great is the change when we turn from the easy1 thoughtless indifferentism of the sportsman or the milliner to the more determined and deliberately chosen attitude of the scientist--so great1 indeed1 that by many people1 even among professed champions of animals' rights1 it is held impossible to trace such dissimilar lines of action to one and the same source4 ,yet it can be shown1 ,i think1 that in this instance1 as in those already examined1 the prime cause of man's injustice to the lower animals is the belief that they are mere automata1 devoid alike of spirit1 character1 and individuality2 only1 while the ignorant sportsman expresses this contempt through the medium of the battue1 and the milliner through that of the bonnet1 the more seriously-minded physiologist works his work in the 8experimental torture0 of the laboratory4 ,the difference lies in the temperament of the men1 and in the tone of their profession2 but in their denial of the most elementary rights of the lower races1 they are all inspired and instigated by one common prejudice4 ,the analytical method employed by modern science tends ultimately1 in the hands of its most enlightened exponents1 to a recognition of the close relationship between mankind and the animals2 but incidentally it has exercised a most sinister effect on the study of the jus animalium among the mass of average men4 ,for consider the dealings of the so-called naturalist with the animals whose nature he makes it his business to observe6 ,in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred1 he is wholly unappreciative of the distinctive quality1 the individuality1 of the subject of his investigations1 and becomes nothing more than a contented accumulator of facts1 an industrious dissector of carcasses4 8,i think the most important requisite in describing an animal10 says ,thoreau1 8is to be sure that you give its character and spirit1 for in that you have1 without error1 the sum and effect of all its parts known and unknown4 ,surely the most important part of an animal is its anima1 its vital spirit1 on which is based its character and all the particulars by which it most concerns us4 ,yet most scientific books which treat of animals leave this out altogether1 and what they describe are1 as it were1 phenomena of dead matter40 ,the whole system of our 8natural history0 as practised at the present time1 is based on a deplorably partial and misleading method4 ,does a rare bird alight on our shores8 ,it is at once slaughtered by some enterprising collector1 and proudly handed over to the nearest taxidermist1 that it may be 8preserved10 among a number of other stuffed corpses1 in the local ,museum4 ,it is a dismal business at best1 this science of the fowling-piece and the dissecting-knife1 but it is in keeping with the utilitarian tendency of a certain school of thought1 and only a few of its professors rise out of it1 and above it1 to a maturer and more far-sighted understanding4 8,the child10 says ,michelet1 8disports himself1 shatters1 and destroys2 he finds his happiness in undoing4 ,and science1 in its childhood1 does the same4 ,it cannot study unless it kills4 ,the sole use which it makes of a living mind is1 in the first place1 to dissect it4 ,none carry into scientific pursuits that tender reverence for life which ,nature rewards by unveiling to us her mysteries40 ,under these circumstances1 it is scarcely to be wondered at that modern scientists1 their minds athirst for further and further opportunities of satisfying this analytical curiosity1 should desire to have recourse to the experimental torture which is euphemistically described as 8vivisection40 ,they are caught and impelled by the overmastering passion of knowledge2 and1 as a handy subject for the gratification of this passion1 they see before them the helpless race of animals1 in part wild1 in part domesticated1 but alike regarded by the generality of mankind as incapable of possessing any 8rights40 ,they are practically accustomed 7despite their ostensible disavowal of the ,cartesian theory7 to treat these animals as automata--things made to be killed and dissected and catalogued for the advancement of knowledge2 they are1 moreover1 in their professional capacity1 the lineal descendants of a class of men who1 however kindly and considerate in other respects1 have never scrupled to subordinate the strongest promptings of humaneness to the least of the supposed interests of science4#ch ,given these conditions1 it seems as inevitable that the physiologist should vivisect as that the country gentleman should shoot4 ,experimental torture is as appropriately the study of the half-enlightened man as sport is the amusement of the half-witted4 ,but the fact that vivisection is not1 as some of its opponents would appear to regard it1 a portentous1 unaccountable phenomenon1 but rather the logical outcome of a certain ill-balanced habit of mind1 does not in any way detract from its intellectual and moral loathsomeness4 ,it is idle to spend a single moment in advocating the rights of the lower animals1 if such rights do not include a total and unqualified exemption from the awful tortures of vivisection--from the doom of being slowly and mercilessly dismembered1 or flayed1 or baked alive1 or infected with some deadly virus1 or subjected to any of the numerous modes of torture inflicted by the ,scientific ,inquisition4#ci ,let us heartily endorse the words of ,miss ,cobbe on this crucial subject3 8,the minimum of all possible rights plainly is--to be spared the worst of all possible wrongs2 and if a horse or dog have no claim to be spared from being maddened and mangled after the fashion of ,pasteur and ,chauveau1 then it is impossible it can have any right at all1 or that any offence against it1 by gentle or simple1 can deserve punishment40 ,the assertion1 commonly made by the apologists of the ,scientific ,inquisition1 that vivisection is justified by its utility--that it is1 in fact1 indispensable to the advance of knowledge and civilization--is founded on a mere half-view of the position2 the scientist1 as ,i have already remarked1 is a half-enlightened man4 ,let us assume 7a large assumption1 certainly1 controverted as it is by some most weighty medical testimony7 that the progress of surgical science is assisted by the experiments of the vivisector4 ,what then8 ,before rushing to the conclusion that vivisection is justifiable on that account1 a wise man will take into full consideration the other1 the moral side of the question--the hideous injustice of torturing a sentient animal1 and the terrible wrong thereby done to the humane sense of the community4#dj ,the wise scientist and the wise humanist are identical4 ,a true science cannot possibly ignore the incontrovertible fact that the practice of vivisection is revolting to the human conscience1 even among the ordinary members of a not over-sensitive society4 ,the so-called 8science0 which overlooks this vital fact1 and confines its view to the material aspects of the problem1 is not science at all1 but a one-sided assertion of the views which find favour with a particular class of specialists4 ,nothing is necessary which is abhorrent1 revolting1 intolerable1 to the general instincts of humanity4 ,better a thousand times that science should forego or postpone the questionable advantage of certain problematical discoveries1 than that the moral conscience of the community should be unmistakably outraged by the confusion of right and wrong4 ,the short cut is not always the right path2 and to perpetrate a cruel injustice to the lower animals1 and then attempt to excuse it on the ground that it will benefit posterity1 is an argument which is as irrelevant as it is immoral4 ,ingenious it may be 7in the way of hoodwinking the unwary7 but it is certainly in no true sense scientific4 ,if there be one bright spot1 one refreshing oasis1 in the discussion of this dreary subject1 it is the humorous recurrence of the old threadbare fallacy of 8better for the animals themselves40 ,yes1 even here1 in the laboratory of the vivisector1 amidst the baking and sawing and dissection1 we are sometimes met by that familiar friend--the proud plea of a single-hearted regard for the interests of the suffering animals6 ,who knows but what some beneficent experimentalist1 if only he be permitted to cut up a sufficient number of victims1 may discover some potent remedy for all the lamented ills of the animal as well as of the human creation8 ,can we doubt that the victims themselves1 if once they could realize the noble object of their martyrdom1 would vie with each other in rushing eagerly on the knife8 ,the only marvel is that1 where the cause is so meritorious1 no human volunteer has as yet come forward to die under the hands of the vivisector6#da ,it is fully admitted that experiments on men would be far more valuable and conclusive than experiments on animals2 yet scientists usually disavow any wish to revive these practices1 and indignantly deny the rumours1 occasionally circulated1 that the poorer patients in hospitals are the subjects of such anatomical curiosity4 ,now here1 it will be observed1 in the case of men1 the moral aspect of vivisection is admitted by the scientist as a matter of course1 yet in the case of animals it is allowed no weight whatever6 ,how can this strange inconsistency be justified1 unless on the assumption that men have rights1 but animals have no rights--in other words1 that animals are mere things1 possessed of no claim on the justice and forbearance of the community8 ,one of the most notable and ominous features in the apologies offered for vivisection is the assertion1 so commonly made by scientific writers1 that it is 8no worse0 than certain kindred practices4 ,when the upholders of any accused institution begin to plead that it is 8no worse0 than other institutions1 we may feel quite assured that the case is a very bad one indeed--it is the drowning man catching at the last straw and shred of argument4 ,thus the advocates of experimental torture are reduced to the expedient of laying stress on the cruelties of the butcher and the herdsman1 and inquiring why1 if pole-axing and castration are permissible1 vivisection may not also be permitted4#db ,sport1 also1 is a practice which has greatly shocked the susceptibilities of the humane vivisector4 ,a writer in the 8,fortnightly ,review0 has defined sport as 8the love of the clever destruction of living things10 and has calculated that three millions of animals are yearly mangled by ,english sportsmen1 in addition to those killed outright4#dc ,now if the attack on vivisection emanated primarily or wholly from the apologists of the sportsman and slaughterer1 this tu quoque of the scientist's must be allowed to be a smart1 though rather flippant1 retort2 but when all cruelty is arraigned as inhuman and unjustifiable1 an evasive answer of this kind ceases to have any pertinence4 ,let us admit1 however1 that1 in contrast with the childish brutality of the sportsman1 the undoubted seriousness and conscientiousness of the vivisector 7for ,i do not question that he acts from conscientious motives7 may be counted to his advantage4 ,but then we have to remember1 on the other hand1 that the conscientious man1 when he goes wrong1 is far more dangerous to society than the knave or the fool2 indeed1 the special horror of vivisection consists precisely in this fact1 that it is not due to mere thoughtlessness and ignorance1 but represents a deliberate1 avowed1 conscientious invasion of the very principle of animals' rights4 ,i have already said that it is idle to speculate which is the worst form of cruelty to animals1 for certainly in this subject1 if anywhere1 we must 8444 reject the lore ,of nicely calculated less or more40 ,vivisection1 if there be any truth at all in the principle for which ,i am contending1 is not the root1 but the flower and consummation of barbarity and injustice--the ne plus ultra of iniquity in man's dealings with the lower races4 ,the root of the evil lies1 as ,i have throughout asserted1 in that detestable assumption 7detestable equally whether it be based on pseudo-religious or pseudo-scientific grounds7 that there is a gulf1 an impassable barrier1 between man and the animals1 and that the moral instincts of compassion1 justice1 and love1 are to be as sedulously repressed and thwarted in the one direction as they are to be fostered and extended in the other4 ,for this very reason our crusade against the ,scientific ,inquisition1 to be thorough and successful1 must be founded on the rock of consistent opposition to cruelty in every form and phase2 it is useless to denounce vivisection as the source of all inhumanities1 and1 while demanding its immediate suppression1 to suppose that other minor questions may be indefinitely postponed4 ,it is true that the actual emancipation of the lower races1 as of the human1 can only proceed step by step1 and that it is both natural and politic to strike first at what is most repulsive to the public conscience4 ,i am not denying the wisdom of such a concentration of effort on any particular point1 but warning my readers against the too common tendency to forget the general principle that underlies each individual protest4 ,the spirit in which we approach these matters should be a liberal and far-seeing one4 ,those who work for the abolition of vivisection1 or any other particular wrong1 should do so with the avowed purpose of capturing one stronghold of the enemy1 not because they believe that the war will then be over1 but because they will be able to use the position thus gained as an advantageous starting-point for still further progression4 ,,chapter ,,viii4 ,,lines ,,of ,,reform4 ,having now applied the principle with which we started to the several cases where it appears to be most flagrantly overlooked1 we are in a better position to estimate the difficulties and the possibilities of its future acceptance4 ,our investigation of animals' rights has necessarily been1 in large measure1 an enumeration of animals' wrongs1 a story of cruelty and injustice which might have been unfolded in far greater and more impressive detail1 had there been any reason for here repeating what has been elsewhere established by other writers beyond doubt or dispute4 ,but my main purpose was to deal with a general principle rather than with particular instances2 and enough has already been said to show that1 while man has much cause to be grateful to the lower animals for the innumerable services rendered by them1 he can hardly pride himself on the record of the counter-benefits which they have received at his hands4 8,if we consider10 says ,primatt1 8the excruciating injuries offered on our part to the brutes1 and the patience on their part2 how frequent our provocation1 and how seldom their resentment 7and in some cases our weakness and their strength1 our slowness and their swiftness72 one would be almost tempted to suppose that the brutes had combined in one general scheme of benevolence1 to teach mankind lessons of mercy and meekness by their own forbearance and longsuffering40 ,it is unwise1 no doubt1 to dwell too exclusively on the wrongs of which animals are the victims2 it is still more unwise to ignore them as they are to-day ignored by the large majority of mankind4 ,it is full time that this question were examined in the light of some rational and guiding principle1 and that we ceased to drift helplessly between the extremes of total indifference on the one hand1 and spasmodic1 partially-applied compassion on the other4 ,we have had enough1 and too much1 of trifling with this or that isolated aspect of the subject1 and of playing off the exposure of somebody else's insensibility by way of a balance for our own1 as if a tu quoque were a sufficient justification of a man's moral delinquencies4 ,the terrible sufferings that are quite needlessly inflicted on the lower animals under the plea of domestic usage1 food-demands1 sport1 fashion1 and science1 are patent to all who have the seeing eye and the feeling heart to apprehend them2 those sufferings will not be lessened1 nor will man's responsibility be diminished by any such irrelevant assertions as that vivisection is less cruel than sport1 or sport less cruel than butchering1--nor yet by the contrary contention that vivisection1 or sport1 or flesh-eating1 as the case may be1 is the prime origin of all human inhumanity4 ,we want a comprehensive principle which will cover all these varying instances1 and determine the true lines of reform4 ,such a principle1 as ,i have throughout insisted1 can only be found in the recognition of the right of animals1 as of men1 to be exempt from any unnecessary suffering or serfdom1 the right to live a natural life of 8restricted freedom10 subject to the real1 not supposed or pretended1 requirements of the general community4 ,it may be said1 and with truth1 that the perilous vagueness of the word 8necessary0 must leave a convenient loop-hole of escape to anyone who wishes to justify his own treatment of animals1 however unjustifiable that treatment may appear2 the vivisector will assert that his practice is necessary in the interests of science1 the flesh-eater that he cannot maintain his health without animal food1 and so on through the whole category of systematic oppression4 ,the difficulty is an inevitable one4 ,no form of words can be devised for the expression of rights1 human or animal1 which is not liable to some sort of evasion2 and all that can be done is to fix the responsibility of deciding between what is necessary and unnecessary1 between factitious personal wants and genuine social demands1 on those in whom is vested the power of exacting the service or sacrifice required4 ,the appeal being thus made1 and the issue thus stated1 it may be confidently trusted that the personal conscience of individuals and the public conscience of the nation1 acting and reacting in turn on each other1 will slowly and surely work out the only possible solution of this difficult and many-sided problem4 ,for that the difficulties involved in this animal question are many and serious1 no one1 ,i imagine1 would dispute1 and certainly no attempt has been made in this essay to minimize or deny them4 ,it may suit the purpose of those who would retard all humanitarian progress to represent its advocates as mere dreamers and sentimentalists--men and women who befool themselves by shutting their eyes to the fierce struggle that is everywhere being waged in the world of nature1 while they point with virtuous indignation to the iniquities perpetrated by man4 ,but it is possible to be quite free from any sentimental illusions1 and yet to hold a very firm belief in the principle of animals' rights4 ,we do not deny1 or attempt to explain away1 the existence of evil in nature1 or the fact that the life of the lower races1 as of mankind1 is based to a large degree on rapine and violence2 nor can we pretend to say whether this evil will ever be wholly amended4 ,it is therefore confessedly impossible1 at the present time1 to formulate an entirely and logically consistent philosophy of rights2 but that would be a poor argument against grappling with the subject at all4 ,nor are the hard unmistakable facts of the situation1 when viewed in their entirety1 by any means calculated to inspire with confidence the opponents of humane reform4 ,for1 if it be true that internecine competition is a great factor in the economy of nature1 it is no less true1 as has been already pointed out1 that co-operation is also a great factor therein4 ,furthermore1 though there are many difficulties besetting the onward path of humanitarianism1 an even greater difficulty has to be faced by those who refuse to proceed along that path1 viz41 the fact--a stronger fact than any that can be produced on the other side--that the instinct of compassion and justice to the lower animals has already been so largely developed in the human conscience as to obtain legislative recognition4 ,if the theory of animals' rights is a mere idealistic phantasy1 it follows that we have long ago committed ourselves to a track which can lead us nowhither4 ,is it then proposed that we should retrace our steps1 with a view to regaining the antique position of savage and consistent callousness2 or are we to remain perpetually in our present meaningless attitude1 admitting the moral value of a partially awakened sensibility1 yet opposing an eternal non possumus to any further improvement8 ,neither of these alternatives is for a moment conceivable2 it is perfectly certain that there will still be a forward movement1 and along the same lines as in the past4 ,nor need we be at all disconcerted by the derisive inquiries of our antagonists as to the final outcome of such theories4 8,there is some reason to hope10 said the author of the ironical 8,vindication of the ,rights of ,brutes10 8that this essay will soon be followed by treatises on the rights of vegetables and minerals1 and that thus the doctrine of perfect equality will become universal40 ,to which suggestion we need only answer1 8,perhaps40 ,it is for each age to initiate its own ethical reforms1 according to the light and sensibility of its own instincts2 further and more abstruse questions1 at present insoluble1 may safely be left to the more mature judgment of posterity4 ,the human conscience furnishes the safest and simplest indicator in these matters4 ,we know that certain acts of injustice affect us as they did not affect our forefathers--it is our duty to set these right4 ,it is not our duty to agitate problems1 which1 at the present date1 excite no unmistakable moral feeling4 ,the humane instinct will assuredly continue to develop4 ,and it should be observed that to advocate the rights of animals is far more than to plead for compassion or justice towards the victims of ill-usage2 it is not only1 and not primarily1 for the sake of the victims that we plead1 but for the sake of mankind itself4 ,our true civilization1 our race-progress1 our humanity 7in the best sense of the term7 are concerned in this development2 it is ourselves1 our own vital instincts1 that we wrong1 when we trample on the rights of the fellow-beings1 human or non-human1 over whom we chance to hold jurisdiction4 ,this most important point is constantly overlooked by the opponents of humanitarian reform4 ,they labour1 unsuccessfully enough1 to minimize the complaints of animals' wrongs1 on the plea that these wrongs1 though great1 are not so great as they are represented to be1 and that in any case it is not possible1 or not urgently desirable1 for man to alleviate them4 ,as if human interests also were not intimately bound up in every such compassionate endeavour6 ,and this brings us back to the moral of the whole matter4 ,the idea of ,humanity is no longer confined to man2 it is beginning to extend itself to the lower animals1 as in the past it has been gradually extended to savages and slaves4 8,behold the animals4 ,there is not one but the human soul lurks within it1 fulfilling its destiny as surely as within you40 ,so writes the author of 8,towards ,democracy02 and what has long been felt by the poet is now being scientifically corroborated by the anthropologist and philosopher4 8,the standpoint of modern thought10 says ,bchner1#dd 8no longer recognizes in animals a difference of kind1 but only a difference of degree1 and sees the principle of intelligence developing through an endless and unbroken series40 ,it is noteworthy that1 on this point1 evolutionary science finds itself in agreement with oriental tradition4 8,the doctrine of metempsychosis10 says ,strauss1#de 8knits men and beasts together here in the ,east1 and unites the whole of ,nature in one sacred and mysterious bond4 ,the breach between the two was opened in the first place by ,judaism1 with its hatred of the ,gods of ,nature1 next by the dualism of ,christianity4 ,it is remarkable that at present a deeper sympathy with the animal world should have arisen among the more civilized nations1 which manifests itself here and there in societies for the prevention of cruelty to animals4 ,it is thus apparent that what on the one hand is the product of modern science--the giving up of the spiritualistic isolation of man from ,nature--reveals itself simultaneously through the channel of popular sentiment40 ,the true scientist and humanist is he who will reconcile brain to heart1 and show us how1 without any sacrifice of what we have gained in knowledge1 we may resume what we have temporarily lost during the process of acquiring that knowledge--the sureness of intuitive faculty which is originally implanted in men and animals alike4 ,only by this return to the common fount of feeling will it be possible for man to place himself in right relationship towards the lower animals1 and to break down the fatal barrier of antipathy that he has himself erected4#df ,if we contrast the mental and moral attitude of the generality of mankind towards the lower races with that of such men as ,st4 ,francis or ,thoreau1 we see what far-reaching possibilities still lie before us on this line of development4 ,a not altogether unjustifiable complaint is made against 8lovers of animals10 that they are often indifferent to the struggle for human rights1 while they concern themselves so eagerly over the interests of the lower races4 ,equally true is the converse statement1 that many earnest reformers and philanthropists1 men who have a genuine passion for human liberty and progress1 are coldly sceptical or even bitterly hostile on the subject of the rights of animals4 ,this organic limitation of sympathies must be recognized and regretted1 but it is worse than useless for the one class of reformers to indulge in blame or recrimination against the other4 ,it is certain that they are both working towards the same ultimate end2 and if they cannot actually co-operate1 they may at least refrain from unnecessarily thwarting and opposing each other4 ,the principles of justice1 if they are to make solid and permanent headway1 must be applied with thoroughness and consistency4 ,if there are rights of animals1 there must fortiori be rights of men2 and1 as ,i have shown1 it is impossible to maintain that an admission of human rights does not involve an admission of animals' rights also4 ,now it may not always fall to the lot of the same persons to advocate both kinds of rights1 but these rights are1 nevertheless1 being simultaneously and concurrently advocated2 and those who are in a position to take a clear and wide survey of the whole humanitarian movement are aware that its final success is dependent on this broad onward tendency4 ,the advent of democracy1 imperfect though any democracy must be which does not embrace all sentient beings within its scope1 will be of enormous assistance to the cause of animals' rights1 for under the present unequal and inequitable social system there is no possibility of those claims receiving their due share of attention4 ,in the rush and hurry of a competitive society1 where commercial profit is avowed to be the main object of work1 and where the well-being of men and women is ruthlessly sacrificed to that object1 what likelihood is there that the lower animals will not be used with a sole regard to the same predominant purpose8 ,humane individuals may here and there protest1 and the growing conscience of the public may express itself in legislation against the worst forms of palpable ill-usage1 but the bulk of the people simply cannot1 and will not1 treat animals as they ought to be treated4 ,do the wealthy classes show any such consideration8 ,let 8amateur butchery0 and 8murderous millinery0 be the answer4 ,can it be wondered1 then1 that the 8lower classes10 whose own rights are existent far more in theory than in fact1 should exhibit a feeling of stolid indifference to the rights of the still lower animals8 ,it is to democracy1 and the democratic sense of kinship and brotherhood1 extending first to mankind1 and then to the lower races1 that we must look for future progress4 ,the emancipation of men will bring with it another and still wider emancipation--of animals4#dg ,in conclusion1 we are brought face to face with this practical problem--by what means can we best provide for the attainment of the end we have in view8 ,what are the surest remedies for the present wrongs1 and the surest pledges for the future rights1 of the victims of human tyranny8 ,there are two pre-eminently important methods1 which are sometimes regarded as contradictory in principle1 but which1 as ,i hope to show1 are not only quite compatible1 but even mutually serviceable and to some degree inter-dependent4 ,we have no choice but to work by one or the other of these methods1 and1 if we are wise1 we shall endeavour to work by both simultaneously1 using the first as our chief instrument of reform1 the second as an auxiliary4 ,i4 ,education1 in the largest sense of the term1 has always been1 and must always remain1 the indispensable condition of humanitarian progress4 ,very excellent are the words of ,john ,bright on the subject3 8,humanity to animals is a great point4 ,if ,i were a teacher in a school1 ,i would make it a very important part of my business to impress every boy and girl with the duty of his or her being kind to all animals4 ,it is impossible to say how much suffering there is in the world from the barbarity or unkindness which people show to what we call the inferior creatures40 ,it may be doubted1 however1 whether the young will ever be specially impressed with the lesson of humanity as long as the general tone of their elders and instructors is one of cynical indifference1 if not of absolute hostility1 to the recognition of animals' rights4#dh ,it is society as a whole1 and not one class in particular1 that needs enlightenment and remonstrance2 in fact1 the very conception and scope of what is known as a 8liberal education0 must be revolutionized and extended4 ,for if we find fault with the narrow and unscientific spirit of what is known as 8science10 we must in fairness admit that our academic 8humanities10 the liter humaniores of colleges and schools1 together with much of our modern culture and refinement1 are scarcely less deficient in the spirit of sympathy and brotherhood4 ,this divorce of 8humanism0 from humaneness is one of the subtlest dangers by which society is beset2 for1 if we grant that love needs to be tempered and directed by wisdom1 still more needful is it that wisdom should be informed and vitalized by love4 ,it is therefore not only our children who need to be educated in the proper treatment of animals1 but our scientists1 our religionists1 our moralists1 and our men of letters4 ,for1 in spite of the great progress of humanitarian ideas during the past century1 it must be confessed that the popular exponents of western thought are still for the most part quite unable to appreciate the profound truth of those words of ,rousseau1 which should form the basis of an enlightened system of instruction3 8,hommes1 soyez humains6 ,c'est votre premier devoir4 ,quelle sagesse y a-t-il pour vous1 hors de l'humanit80 ,but how is this vast educational change to be inaugurated8 ,like all far-reaching reforms which are promoted by a few believers in the face of the public indifference1 it can only be carried through by the energy and resolution of its supporters4 ,the efforts which the various humane societies are now making in special directions1 each concentrating its attack on a particular abuse1 must be supplemented and strengthened by a crusade--an intellectual1 literary1 and social crusade--against the central cause of oppression1 viz43 the disregard of the natural kinship between man and the animals1 and the consequent denial of their rights4 ,we must insist on having the whole question fully considered and candidly discussed1 and must no longer permit its most important issues to be shirked because it does not suit the convenience or the prejudices of comfortable folk to give attention to them4 ,above all1 the sense of ridicule that at present attaches to the supposed 8sentimentalism0 of an advocacy of animals' rights must be faced and swept away4 ,the fear of this absurd charge deprives the cause of humanity of many workers who would otherwise lend their aid1 and accounts in part for the unduly diffident and apologetic tone which is too often adopted by humanitarians4 ,we must meet this ridicule1 and retort it without hesitation on those to whom it properly pertains4 ,the laugh must be turned against the true 8cranks0 and 8crotchet-mongers0--the noodles who can give no wiser reason for the infliction of suffering on animals than that it is 8better for the animals themselves0--the flesh-eaters who labour under the pious belief that animals were 8sent0 to us as food--the silly women who imagine that the corpse of a bird is a becoming article of head-gear--the half-witted sportsmen who vow that the vigour of the ,english race is dependent on the practice of fox-hunting--and the half-enlightened scientists who are unaware that vivisection has moral and spiritual1 no less than physical1 consequences4 ,that many of our arguments are mere superficial sword-play1 and do not touch the profound emotional sympathies on which the cause of humanity rests1 is a fact which does not lessen their controversial significance4 ,for this is a case where those who take the sword shall perish by the sword2 and the clever men-of-the-world who twit consistent humanitarians with sentimentality may perhaps discover that they themselves--fixed as they are in an ambiguous and utterly untenable position--are the sickliest sentimentalists of all4 ,,ii4 ,legislation1 where the protection of harmless animals is concerned1 is the fit supplement and sequel to education1 and the objections urged against it are for the most part unreasonable4 ,it must inevitably fail in its purpose1 say some2 for how can the mere passing of a penal statute prevent the innumerable unwitnessed acts of cruelty and oppression which make up the great total of animal suffering8 ,but the purpose of legislation is not merely thus preventive4 ,legislation is the record1 the register1 of the moral sense of the community2 it follows1 not precedes1 the development of that moral sense1 but nevertheless in its turn reacts on it1 strengthens it1 and secures it against the danger of retrocession4 ,it is well that society should proclaim1 formally and decisively1 its abhorrence of certain practices2 and ,i do not think it can be doubted1 by those who have studied the history of the movement1 that the general treatment of domestic animals in this country1 bad as it still is1 would be infinitely worse at this day but for the legislation that dates from the passing of 8,martin's ,act0 in #ahbb4 ,the further argument so commonly advanced1 that 8force is no remedy10 and that it is better to trust to the good feeling of mankind than to impose a legal restriction1 is an amiable criticism which might doubtless be applied with great effect to a large majority of our existing penal enactments1 but it is not very applicable to the case under discussion4 ,for if force is ever allowable1 surely it is so when it is applied for a strictly defensive purpose1 such as to safeguard the weak and helpless from violence4 ,the protection of animals by statute marks but another step onward in that course of humanitarian legislation which1 among numerous triumphs1 has abolished slavery and passed the ,factory ,acts--always in the teeth of this same time-honoured objection that 8force is no remedy40 ,equally fatuous is the assertion that the administrators of the law cannot be trusted to adjudicate between master and 8beast40 ,it was long ago stated by ,lord ,erskine that 8to distinguish the severest discipline1 for enforcing activity and commanding obedience in such dependents1 from brutal ferocity and cruelty1 never yet puzzled a judge or jury--never1 at least1 in my long experience40 ,such arguments against the legal protection of animals were admirably refuted by ,john ,stuart ,mill3 8,the reason for legal intervention in favour of children apply not less strongly to the case of those unfortunate slaves and victims of the most brutal part of mankind1 the lower animals4 ,it is by the grossest misunderstanding of the principles of ,liberty that the infliction of exemplary punishment on ruffianism practised towards these defenceless beings has been treated as a meddling by ,government with things beyond its province--an interference with domestic life4 ,the domestic life of domestic tyrants is one of the things which it is most imperative on the ,law to interfere with4 ,and it is to be regretted that metaphysical scruples respecting the nature and source of the authority of governments should induce many warm supporters of laws against cruelty to the lower animals to seek for justification of such laws in the incidental consequences of the indulgence of ferocious habits to the interest of human beings1 rather than in the intrinsic merits of the thing itself4 ,what it would be the duty of a human being1 possessed of the requisite physical strength1 to prevent by force1 if attempted in his presence1 it cannot be less incumbent on society generally to repress4 ,the existing laws of ,england are chiefly defective in the trifling--often almost nominal--maximum to which the penalty1 even in the worst cases1 is limited40#di ,only with the gradual progress of an enlightened sense of equality shall we remedy these wrongs2 and the object of our crusade should be not so much to convert opponents 7who1 by the very disabilities and limitations of their faculties1 can never be really converted17 as to set the confused problem in a clear light1 and at least discriminate unmistakably between our enemies and our allies4 ,in all social controversies the issues are greatly obscured by the babel of names and phrases and cross arguments that are bandied to and fro2 so that many persons1 who by natural sympathy and inclination are the friends of reform1 are found to be ranked among its foes2 while not a few of its foes1 in similar unconsciousness1 have strayed into the opposite camp4 ,to state the issues distinctly1 and so attract and consolidate a genuine body of support1 is1 perhaps1 at the present time1 the best service that humanitarians can render to the movement they wish to promote4 ,in conclusion1 ,i would state emphatically that this essay is not an appeal ad misericordiam to those who themselves practise1 or who condone in others1 the deeds against which a protest is here raised4 ,it is not a plea for 8mercy0 7save the mark67 to the 8brute-beasts0 whose sole criminality consists in not belonging to the noble family of homo sapiens4 ,it is addressed rather to those who see and feel that1 as has been well said1 8the great advancement of the world1 throughout all ages1 is to be measured by the increase of humanity and the decrease of cruelty0--that man1 to be truly man1 must cease to abnegate his common fellowship with all living nature--and that the coming realization of human rights will inevitably bring after it the tardier but not less certain realization of the rights of the lower races4 ,,appendix ,i ,,the ,,term 8,,rights0#ej ,it was argued by ,mr4 ,d4 ,g4 ,ritchie1 in his book on 8,natural ,rights10 that though 8we may be said to have duties of kindness towards the animals10 it is 8incorrect to represent these as strictly duties towards the animals themselves1 as if they had rights against us40 7,the italics are ,mr4 ,ritchie's47 ,i take this to mean that1 in man's 8duty of kindness10 it is the 8kindness0 only that has reference to animals1 the 8duty0 being altogether the private affair of the man4 ,the kindness is1 so to speak1 the water1 and the duty is the tap2 and the convenience of this arrangement is that the man can shut off the kindness whenever it suits him to do so2 as1 for example1 it suited ,mr4 ,ritchie in regard to the question of vivisection4 ,it is strange that ethical authorities should thus hold1 as ,catholic theologians do1 that we owe no direct duties to animals1 and that animals not being 8persons0 have1 strictly speaking1 no rights4 ,indeed1 so entertaining did the very idea of the 8personality0 of animals appear to ,mr4 ,ritchie that he waxed humorous in his desire to know whether a sponge is a 8person0 or 8several persons10 and whether the parasites on a dog are to be respected as 8persons10 and so forth4 ,on the other side1 the humanitarian contention is quite clear--that there is no difference in kind between man and the other animals1 nor any warrant in science or ethics for drawing between them1 as between 8persons0 and 8things10 an absolute line of demarcation4 ,compelled to admit that the difference is only one of degree1 ,mr4 ,ritchie sought to evade the significance of this fact by arguing that it does not follow that1 if men have rights1 animals also have rights 8in the same sense of the term40 ,i maintain that it does so follow4 ,if by the recognition of rights we mean that man1 as a sentient and intelligent being1 should be exempt from all avoidable suffering1 it follows that other beings who are also sentient and intelligent1 though in a lower degree1 should have1 in a lower degree1 the same exemption4 ,this principle1 if pressed to its extreme logical conclusion1 will of course lead1 like all other principles1 to what ,mr4 ,ritchie called 8difficult questions of casuistry10 and will open a door for small jokes about the personality of parasites and sponges4 ,then1 again1 it is too often overlooked that the rights claimed for animals1 as for men1 are not absolute but conditional 78this restricted freedom0 is ,herbert ,spencer's expression71 and that a recognition of the rights of other beings is not incompatible with an equal assertion of one's own4 ,self-defence is the first and most obvious right of everyone4 ,if1 for instance1 we hold that a tiger has a right to be spared any unnecessary torture1 are we compelled on that account to allow him to eat us if he comes out of his cage8 ,and how would our shooting the tiger1 under those untoward circumstances1 prove that the tiger is not a 8person10 inasmuch as murderers and human tigers1 are similarly treated under similar conditions8 ,this 8tiger0 argument1 to which ,professor ,ritchie was much addicted1 is really very small game4 #ahie4 ,,ii ,,the ,,neo-,,cartesians#ea ,attempts are still made1 from time to time1 to revive the old ,cartesian doctrine that animals do not feel pain4 ,thus ,mr4 ,e4 ,kay ,robinson1 in a book entitled 8,the ,religion of ,nature0 7#aijf7 has sought to bring peace and comfort to the minds of his readers1 and to reconcile the seeming cruelties of ,nature with the existence of a merciful ,god1 by proving that the non-human races1 unlike mankind1 have no consciousness of suffering1 even when they exhibit all the symptoms of pain and show a dread of its recurrence4 ,this is nothing but the ancient doctrine of ,descartes in a new garb1 and is itself the outcome of the old anthropocentric view of the world4 ,on the practical results that would follow the general acceptance of ,mr4 ,robinson's theories it is hardly worth while to speculate4 ,he himself is at pains to suggest that while the ,cartesian doctrine undoubtedly led to cruelty in the past1 the modern ,robinsonian version of it would have the opposite effect4 ,i greatly doubt it4 ,for to whatever extent it is true that animals are unconscious of pain1 to the same extent it must be true that there is no 8cruelty0 7in the true sense of the term7 in 8paining0 them4 ,an enlightened man1 no doubt1 will avoid any tyrannical interference with the lives of other beings1 whether they are conscious or not1 but the majority of men are not enlightened1 nor in any hurry to become so2 we are living1 in fact1 in an age of very gross and palpable savagery1 out of which nothing can lift us but the growing sense of kinship4 ,mr4 ,robinson's book is one of the latest attempts--and1 in some respects1 the feeblest--to impair in a very important respect this sense of close kinship between the human and the non-human1 and for that reason ,i regard it as very mischievous in its tendency4 ,as a fair instance of ,mr4 ,robinson's logic1 let us take his triumphant citation of the fact that even a human being1 when engaged in some desperate and painful struggle1 is often conscious1 for the moment1 of neither fear nor pain4 ,from this ,mr4 ,robinson quietly assumes that animals are always thus unconscious1 because 7a7 some of their actions and emotions are so1 and 7b7 8we have no right to suppose that one action or emotion of an animal is more conscious than another40 ,but1 on the contrary1 we have every right to suppose that consciousness varies in animals1 as in men1 as may be gathered from the indifference which two fighting dogs will show to the blows rained upon them by their owners1 though at a moment of less excitement the same blows would elicit the most obvious signs of pain4 ,the crux of the whole problem lies here--in the meaning of the gestures by which animals appear to indicate that1 like human beings1 they are conscious of their various emotions1 and it is by his chapter on 8,actions of ,animals ,explained0 that ,mr4 ,robinson's treatise must be judged4 ,humanitarians entirely reject his dogmatic assertion 7to take a typical example7 that 8a dog's exhibition of distress when separated from its master and mistress is only the working of the strong instinct of the gregarious1 hunting animal1 needing the primary factor of his life1 namely1 a leader to follow40 ,not a particle of real proof can be given in support of such statements1 and it is upon foundations of this kind that the 8,religion of ,nature0 is built4 ,and here there come to mind those trenchant words of ,mr4 ,cunninghame ,graham1 which exactly describe the tone and method of ,mr4 ,robinson's argument3 8,instinct and reason2 the hypothetical difference which good weak men use as an ansthetic1 when their conscience pricks them for their sins of omission and commission to their four-footed brethren4 ,but a distinction wholly without a difference1 and a link in the long chain of fraud and force with which we bind all living things1 men1 animals1 and most of our reasoning selves1 in one crass neutral-tinted slavery40 ,,iii ,,motor ,,versus ,,horse#eb 8,after many centuries of usefulness10 so it is said1 8the horse is about to be retired from active service as an agent in locomotion40 ,electricity1 petrol1 and cable tramcars are to be the chief factors in this change1 which will replace horsepower by the greater energies of mechanical invention1 and will make it possible to ride a hundred miles 8for about a shilling40 ,looking at the matter as humanitarians we are heartily pleased at the prospect4 ,to be sure1 it is not very creditable to the good feelings of mankind that1 8after many centuries of usefulness10 the horse should be 8retired10 not because we are ashamed of the ill-usage he has received1 but because we have discovered a cheaper method of traction2 nor is it pleasant to reflect on the countless myriads of undeserved blows and curses that have descended on our faithful friend and helper during the period of his service4 ,but letting that pass1 as one of the many blots with which the pages of history are disfigured1 we rejoice to think that the wretched system of horse-traction is perhaps drawing to a close1 and we trust that the present century will see it legally prohibited in ,england1 as dog-traction has already been4 ,no doubt we shall hear a lot of sentimental talk about the picturesque beauty of the horse1 the ugliness of machinery1 and so forth2 but we shall know what to reply to such 8sthetic0 arguments1 with the experience before us 7or1 let us hope1 behind us7 of the hackney-cab1 the tramcar1 and the tradesman's cart and wagon4 ,the usage of the horse1 in our so-called civilization1 has reached a pitch of sordid deformity which1 even if regarded solely from the point of view of the artist1 makes it impossible to advance any valid argument against the motor-car4 ,however unromantic such mechanical conveyance may be1 it will at least save us from the unseemly sights that have outraged every sense of beauty1 decency and humaneness4 ,the motor will not be recklessly overloaded2 it will not be cursed1 and thrashed1 and wrenched out of its natural shape by way of an outlet for the savage temper of its driver2 for curiously enough1 the lifeless machine will be treated with far more respect1 and in a far more rational spirit1 than the living animal1 and the conductor who should ill-use a car1 as horses are now ill-used1 would be promptly conveyed to the nearest police-cell or lunatic-asylum4 ,but what1 it may be asked1 is to become of the horse himself1 in the new age of machinery8 ,is 8retirement10 in his case1 to be the same thing as extinction8 ,we do not know2 but we know this--that1 in the case of our 8beasts of burden10 merciful extinction is a preferable fate to what is humorously called 8preservation40 ,centuries hence1 perhaps1 some learned antiquarian will reconstruct1 from such anatomical data as may be available1 the gaunt1 misshapen1 pitiable figure of the ,london cab-horse1 and a more humane and enlightened posterity will shudder at the sight of what we still regard as a legitimate 8agent in locomotion40 ,from ,the ,humanitarian4 #ahif4 ,,iv ,,zoological ,,gardens4#ec ,some fifty or sixty years ago the poet1 ,james ,thomson 78,b4,v4071 wrote as follows in his journal3-- 8,it being a very wet ,sunday1 ,i had to keep in1 and paced much1 prisoner-like1 to and fro my room4 ,this reminded me of the wild beasts at ,regent's ,park1 and especially of the great wild birds1 the vultures and eagles4 ,how they must suffer6 ,how long will it be ere the thought of such agonies becomes intolerable to the public conscience1 and wild creatures be left at liberty when they need not be killed4 ,three or four centuries1 perhaps40 ,this gloomy prognostication hardly seems likely to be fulfilled1 for there has lately been a great awakening of the conscience1 if not of the general public1 at least of the humaner section of it1 and much improvement in the condition of the wild animals in the 8,zoo0 has now been effected4 ,ever since its establishment in #ahia the ,humanitarian ,league has been drawing attention to the cruelty of cellular imprisonment for animals as for men1 and it is therefore with legitimate satisfaction that humanitarians note the introduction of a reform which they were the first to advocate4 ,here1 for example1 is an extract from a pamphlet which ,i wrote for the ,league in #ahie1 under the title of 8,a ,zoophilist at the ,zoo03-- 8#8,christianos ad leones' was the cry of the heathen persecutors in ages long past1 when the ,christian martyrs were flung to the lions in the ,roman amphitheatre4 ,time has now had his revenges2 but we do not know that the new version of #8,christianos ad leones1' as daily exemplified in the stream of visitors to the lion-houses at the ,zoo1 is altogether edifying4 ,indeed1 it has sometimes occurred to us1 when musing on that strange medley of thoughtless sight-seers1 who derive an unaccountable pleasure from staring at the wretched life-prisoners in our great animal convict-station1 that the infra-human is not always confined to the inner side of the bars1 and that there was some force in ,thoreau's epigram that ,god made man #8a little lower than the animals4' ,well1 we must hope for better things in the future4 ,less than a century ago it was the fashion to cage pauper lunatics where passers-by could see them2 and benevolent nurses1 when inclined to give a treat to the children in their charge1 would pleasantly take them to have a peep at the frenzied ravings of the maniacs4 ,we marvel now to hear of such inhumanity1 but it may be that a future generation will equally marvel to hear that the sight of caged animals--those martyrs of ,christian civilization--could give any satisfaction to the children1 and the grown-up children to whom a 8,zoo0 is a ,paradise4 8,it all depends on how we look at these things4 ,at present menageries are simply part of the whole system which regards the lower animals as mere goods and chattels1 created for the use and amusement of mankind1 without any definite claim1 in return1 to a free and healthy existence4 ,the animals are no more than subjects for the museum or menagerie1 the laboratory or dissecting-room4 ,does a rare bird alight on our shores8 ,our object is to knock it down first1 and1 as the taxidermists say1 #8set it up' afterwards2 or1 if it still lives1 to confine it in a cage or aviary4 ,the ,london ,gardens are doubtless a great deal better than many other menageries2 but our whole method of treating animals is stupid and barbarous4 ,we want a more humane and intelligent appreciation of animal life1 and that sense of kinship which would make us desirous of seeing our rudimentary brethren under happier and more natural conditions4 ,and1 after all1 we have ourselves paid the penalty for our lack of humanity1 by the loss of humour that accompanied it2 for the bathos of the notices that used to meet us at every turn in the ,gardens was very depressing to those who were alive enough to feel it4 ,the ,bengal ,tigers' den labelled1 #8,beware of ,pickpockets'6 ,the ,eagles' ,aviaries labelled1 #8,to the ,refreshment ,rooms'6 ,were ever such incongruous ideas set in such ludicrous proximity8 ,there1 disconsolate in durance vile1 sat the fabled ,bird of ,jove1 who bore off ,ganymede to be the god's cup-bearer1 while1 within a few yards1 the modern ,ganymede was serving out coffees and lemon-squashes1 and enjoying 7though perhaps he knew it not7 the most complete vengeance on the great ,raptor who enslaved him40 ,the most powerful indictment of the ,zoological ,gardens1 as they were1 was the series of articles contributed by ,mr4 ,edmund ,selous to the ,saturday ,review in #aija1 and afterwards reprinted as a pamphlet by the ,humanitarian ,league1 under the title 8,the ,old ,zoo and the ,new10 a picture of what the ,zoo actually was1 as contrasted with what it might become4 ,it was the publication of this trenchant criticism1 synchronizing as it did with a movement for reform within the ,zoological ,society itself1 that brought about the present improved state of public opinion as to the management of the ,gardens1 and caused the ,daily ,mail1 that enterprising journal which is ready to exploit even humanitarian ideas when they seem likely to be popular1 to publish a number of caustic articles on 8,the ,tortured ,animals at the ,zoo40 ,from ,america comes the same complaint1 as in the following passage taken from an article in ,our ,animal ,friends 7,new ,york73-- 8,it is indeed high time that the conditions of animals in menageries and zoological establishments should be made a subject of very practical concern4 ,in many cases their condition is pitiable4 ,few things are more distressing to observe than the restive motions of the larger cats1 such as lions1 tigers1 and leopards1 or of smaller animals like wolves and foxes1 pacing back and forth in their small dens1 as if suffering an agony of restlessness1 as indeed they often must be4 ,no animal ought to be kept in any such condition1 and the time may come--we think it has already come--when this form of cruelty may be abolished by the strong hand of law1 where it cannot be terminated by the milder methods of persuasion40 ,v ,,scientist ,,and ,,sacerdotalist#ed ,what do our up-to-date scientists think 7if they think at all7 of the justification of vivisection put forward by ,monsignor ,john ,s4 ,vaughan1 a sacerdotalist of the medieval school8 ,to a watchful observer few things could have been more entertaining than the spectacle of an old-world ,catholic1 a belated casuist of 7say7 thirteenth century temperament1 coming forward in the ,saturday ,review 7new style7 to justify1 from a moral standpoint1 the doings of the modern vivisector1 and basing his argument on the immemorial 8proposition0 that 8beasts exist for the use and benefit of man40 ,now1 there are undoubtedly numbers of persons living in this twentieth century who still hold the belief that the animals were created for man's pleasure1 and it may be that1 in appealing to that ancient superstition1 ,mgr4 ,vaughan was using the most popular weapon in the pro-vivisectionist armoury4 ,but whatever the 8man in the street0 may think on this subject1 the evolutionist and man of science1 at any rate1 is not able to take refuge in the plea that man is the centre of the universe1 and that all other beings were created for mankind2 for if there is one thing above others that ,darwin's followers have scouted1 it is this old anthropocentric notion which forms the ,monsignor's 8proposition40 ,the animals1 according to the scientific view1 were not designed for man's benefit1 nor is there any impassable gulf between human and non-human--on the contrary1 man was evolved from among the animals1 and is in very truth an animal himself4 ,this is the creed1 beyond denial or evasion1 of the ,darwinian scientists1 whose torture of their rudimentary brethren the sacerdotalist is so eager to condone4 ,monsignor ,vaughan is defending vivisection by an assumption which the vivisectors themselves must hold to be unscientific and obsolete4 ,the sufficient answer to the anthropocentric fallacy of the theologian is found in ,mr4 ,howard ,moore's laconic remark3 8,but ,darwin has lived40 ,but vivisection has got to be defended somehow1 on moral1 as well as medical1 grounds2 and to do ,monsignor ,vaughan justice the ground he alleges is the only one that can afford1 or could once have afforded1 any semblance of logical foot-hold4 8,beasts exist for the use and benefit of man40 ,in that unquestioned belief lay the justification--the supposed justification--of the horrible tortures inflicted on animals in the medicinal and magical quackery of the middle ages1 when1 as ,dr4 ,berdoe has pointed out1 8the nastier the medicament the more was expected of it40 ,animals were regarded alike by the religion1 and the science1 and the common usage of the times1 as mere things1 providentially designed to be the instruments of man's welfare1 at the cost of whatever suffering to themselves4 ,what1 therefore1 if they were carved1 and tortured1 and vivisected to provide mankind with the filthy nostrums prescribed as the remedies for disease8 ,an anthropocentric philosophy could explain and justify it all4 ,and so it might do at the present time1 but for the fact that the anthropocentric philosophy--as a philosophy--has itself ceased to exist4 ,indeed1 the point of the complaint against the scientists is precisely this--that the practice of vivisection1 though perhaps logically justifiable on the absurd old belief that animals have no raison d'tre except to minister to man's convenience1 is wholly unjustifiable in the light of evolutionary science1 which has demonstrated beyond question the kinship of all sentient life4 ,that the scientist1 in order to rake together a moral defence for his doings1 should condescend to take shelter even under the medieval reasoning of the sacerdotalist1 is a proof that his position is hopelessly inconsistent and unsound2 for having got rid of the old anthropocentric fallacy in the realm of science1 he actually avails himself of the same fallacy in the realm of ethics4 ,this1 of course1 is less surprising when we remember that one and the same person may be1 and often is1 as reactionary in one department of thought as he is progressive in another1 and that the modern man of science is not infrequently a medievalist in morals4 ,the present writer well remembers the incident which first shook his faith in the infallibility of 8science40 ,he had adopted a vegetarian diet1 and a distinguished scientist with whom he happened to be on friendly terms expressed a wish to 8speak to him0 on the subject4 ,the writer felt that a critical moment had arrived1 and awaited the scientific pronouncement with respectful anxiety4 ,when it came--spoken with evident earnestness--it was this3 8,don't you think the animals were sent us as food80 ,so we see the scientist and the sacerdotalist1 forgetting their radical differences1 patching up a superficial alliance with the pious object of perpetuating the experimental torture of the laboratory4 ,henceforward let none say that ,darwinian and ,catholic are not in agreement4 ,laborare est orare was the old saying2 and now surely it should be expanded by ,monsignor ,vaughan and his ,catholic fellow-vivisectionists into laboratorium est oratorium--the house of torture is the house of prayer4 ,if it is not exactly 8mercy and truth0 that are met together1 8righteousness and peace0 that have kissed each other1 still it is a beautiful and touching scene of reconciliation--this meeting of scientist and sacerdotalist over the torture-trough of the helpless animal4 ,they might exclaim in the words of ,tennyson3-- 8,there above the little grave1 ,o there above the little grave1 ,we kissed again with tears40 ,it seems to us as humanitarians1 that1 as far as ,monsignor ,vaughan and the ,catholic vivisectionist school is concerned 7it is otherwise with the scientists71 it is pure waste of time to argue with them1 there being a fundamental difference of opinion as to data and principles4 ,the sole reason for discussion is to insure that the humanitarian view of the question be rightly placed before the public1 and this can best be done by stating it clearly in contradistinction to the anthropocentric dogma4 ,we do not admit the assumption that 8beasts exist for the use and benefit of man40 ,we view the matter in a wholly different aspect4 ,we find ourselves born into an age which has been evolved in a gradual progress from savagery to civilization1 with old-world wrongs around us1 the worst of which are being slowly redeemed1 century after century1 by a growing spirit of brotherhood4 ,we have never pretended that these wrongs1 woven as they are into the fabric of ,society1 can be immediately and simultaneously righted1 nor do we admit1 in the case of the lower animals any more than in the case of men1 that the necessity of inflicting some pain confers the right to inflict any pain4 ,we insist on the undeniable tendency from barbarism to humaneness1 which has already at many points bridged the gulf between man and man1 and will also bridge the gulf between man and his lower fellow-creatures4 ,science has exploded the idea that there is any difference in kind1 and not in degree only1 between the human and the non-human animal2 and sympathy1 guided by reason1 is making it more and more impossible that we should for ever treat as mere automata fellow-beings to whom we are1 in fact1 very closely akin4 ,humane ,review1 #aija4 ,,vi ,,the ,,confessions ,,of ,a ,,physician#ee 8,confessions of a ,physician10 by ,v4 ,veresaeff1 is a ,russian work1 first published in #aija1 the writer of which exposes with the utmost frankness the secrets of the medical profession--the doubts1 difficulties1 dangers1 scruples1 failures1 and even homicides1 that fall to the lot of the practitioner4 ,it is not that ,veresaeff is disloyal to his colleagues2 but his judgment is drawn in two opposite directions by his sense of duty to ,science on the one side1 and to ,morality on the other1 and is exercised by the problem of how to reconcile the 8necessities10 as he conceives them1 of medical research with the 8rights10 as he cannot but admit them to be1 of its human and non-human victims4 ,hence1 though ,veresaeff is himself only in part a humanitarian1 his book has considerable interest for humanitarian readers4 ,in a dissertation on the ,english anti-vivisection movement1 from which the ,russian movement originated1 ,veresaeff1 while not stifling his misgivings1 falls back on the assertion that vivisection is necessary1 because it is impossible without it to know the living organism4 ,he is very contemptuous of the 8clergymen1 society ladies1 statesmen1 persons entirely unassociated with science10 who seek to refute the scientists2 but then1 veering to the moral side of the question1 he makes the following reference to this book on 8,animals' ,rights03 8,however1 we must give them their due2 for not all the anti-vivisectionists base their opinions upon such crude and ignorant tenets4 ,a number of them seek to base the whole question upon foundations of pure principle2 thus1 for instance1 the author of #8,animals' ,rights1 ,considered in relation to ,social ,progress1' says3 #8,let us assume that the progress of surgical science is assisted by the experiments of the vivisector4 ,what then8 ,before rushing to the conclusion that vivisection is justifiable on that account1 a wise man will take into full consideration the other--the moral side of the question--the hideous injustice of torturing an innocent animal4' ,this is the only possible and fitting position for the anti-vivisectionist to take up2 whether science can dispense with vivisection or not1 does not concern him2 animals are made to suffer1 and that settles everything4 ,the question is plainly put1 and there can be no room for any equivocation4 ,i repeat1 we ought not to ridicule the pretensions of the anti-vivisectionists--the sufferings of animals are truly horrible--and sympathy with them is not sentimentality2 but we must bear in mind that there is no #8way round1' where the building up of scientific medicine--its goal--the healing of mankind--is at stake40#ef ,while welcoming this statement1 ,i must point out that in the passage of 8,animals' ,rights0 7p4 #ga7 to which ,dr4 ,veresaeff refers1 ,i did not for a moment admit that vivisection is necessary to surgical science2 ,i merely assumed it for purposes of argument1 and ,i added the important qualifying words which are omitted in the ,russian quotation3 8,a large assumption certainly1 controverted as it is by some most weighty medical testimony40 ,it is necessary to point this out1 because we humanitarians do not share ,dr4 ,veresaeff's perplexity1 swayed as he is between the demands of a vivisecting science and the protests of a suffering humanity2 on the contrary1 we are convinced that the painful contradiction between conflicting duties1 by which his mind is troubled1 is a phantom of his own creation4 ,no doubt if he assumes that one particular science1 that of medicine1 must pursue its course regardless of any other science1 such as that of morals1 he will find himself confronted by problems and contradictions innumerable1 to which no direct answer can be given2 but that very assumption is one which no clear-headed thinker will grant4 ,no single science can make true progress at the expense of another science2 and when such conflicts arise they are a sign that there is something wrong1 and that it is time to pause and to reflect4 ,medical problems1 like all others1 can only be solved in the solution of the social question as a whole1 and there is no royal road to the achievement of medical aspirations4 ,,vii ,,antipathy ,,or ,,sympathy8#eg ,it is to be regretted that so distinguished a writer as ,mr4 ,g4 ,k4 ,chesterton should have given countenance to the idea that an assertion of the rights of animals implies a denial of the rights of man4 8,i use the word humanitarian10 he says 7in his book 8,orthodoxy107 8in the ordinary sense1 as meaning one who upholds the claims of all creatures against those of humanity40 ,this strange blunder of supposing that we humanitarians regard the interests of humans and sub-humans as antagonistic to each other seems to arise from a misunderstanding of our statement that1 in the spread of humane feelings1 there is a gradual1 not immediate1 recognition of kinship1 embracing first the family1 then the fellow citizen1 then the slave1 and then the non-human race--a progressive sense of morality which is thus ridiculed by ,mr4 ,chesterton3 8,i think it wrong to sit on a man4 ,soon1 ,i shall think it wrong to sit on a horse4 ,eventually 7,i suppose17 ,i shall think it wrong to sit on a chair4 ,that is the drive of the argument4444 ,a perpetual tendency1 to touch fewer and fewer things might1 one feels1 be a mere brute unconscious tendency1 like that of a species to produce fewer and fewer children40 ,mr4 ,chesterton1 it will be seen1 supposes that the trend of humanitarian thought is merely 8to touch fewer and fewer things0--to 8touch10 that is1 with the whip1 the hob-nailed boot1 the hunting-knife1 the scalpel1 or the pole-axe4 ,he wholly fails to see that what we really desire is to 8touch0 not fewer and fewer things1 but more and more--i4e41 to get into touch with them by virtue of that sympathetic intelligence which shows us that they are akin to ourselves4 ,why1 ultimately1 do we object to such practices as vivisection1 blood-sport1 and the butchery of animals for food8 ,because of the cruelty involved in them1 no doubt2 but also1 and even more1 because of the hideous narrowing of our own human sympathies and human pleasures which these savage customs involve4 ,let ,mr4 ,chesterton imagine the existence of an ogreish race of men so powerful that wherever one of them appeared1 all ordinary mortals would be fain to run at full speed into holes and corners to escape him4 ,would these tyrants find it to be a diminution1 and not rather a vast increase1 of their enjoyment1 if they learnt gradually 8to touch fewer and fewer things0 in the ogreish sense1 while they touched more and more in the sense of brotherhood and friendship8 ,precisely the same in kind1 though not1 of course1 in degree1 is the relation1 as apprehended by humanitarians1 of man towards the lower animals4 ,equally erroneous is ,mr4 ,chesterton's assumption that mankind is1 in some special and exclusive sense1 a 8society10 different in kind1 and not in degree only1 from the lower races4 8,mankind is not a tribe of animals to which we owe compassion4 ,mankind is a club to which we owe our subscription4 ,pity1 the vague sentiment of the sunt lacrym rerum1 is due indisputably to everything that lives4 ,and as regards this1 the difference between our pity for suffering men and our pity for suffering animals is very possibly only a question of degree4 ,but the difference between our moral relation to men and to animals is not a difference of degree in the least4 ,it is a difference of kind4 ,what we owe to a human being we owe to a fellow-member of a fixed1 responsible1 and reciprocal society4444 ,this is the basic error upon which all ,mr4 ,salt's school goes wrong4 ,they will not see that when we talk of human superiority we do not mean superiority in a degree on an inclined plane2 we mean the existence of a certain definite society1 different from everything else1 and founded not on the sorrows of all living1 but on the rights of men4 ,cruelty to man and cruelty to animals are two quite detestable1 but quite different1 sins4444 ,the man who breaks a cat's back breaks a cat's back4 ,the man who breaks a man's back breaks an implied treaty4 ,the tyrant to animals is a tyrant4 ,the tyrant to men is a traitor4 ,nay1 he is a rebel1 for man is royal40#eh ,mankind1 says ,mr4 ,chesterton1 is a society4 ,but so are bees and beavers4 ,there are innumerable societies1 and it is impossible to prove that human society is more organic or more conclusive than the rest4 ,our sense of kinship is continually widening1 and there never has been1 nor is1 any finality in the social bond of which ,mr4 ,chesterton speaks4 ,it would have surprised the ,greek or ,roman of old to be informed that he was a member of the same society with the barbarian or the slave4 ,it would hardly be admitted by the white ,american of to-day that he and the ,african negro are own brethren4 ,that1 presumably1 is because their sympathies are not yet developed enough to enable them to see even the fact of human kinship2 but what if ,mr4 ,chesterton's sympathies are not developed enough to enable him to see what many less subtle intellects have already seen--that beyond this 8human0 society there is the still larger society of the higher sentient existence4 8,the man who breaks a cat's back breaks a cat's back40 ,this terse saying contains the root of all cruelty to animals1 the quintessence of all the anthropocentric bigotry which has caused the immemorial ill-usage of the non-human races through the length and breadth of the world4 8,the man who breaks a cat's back breaks a cat's back40 ,yes1 and the scientist who vivisects a dog1 vivisects a dog2 the sportsman who breaks up a hare breaks up a hare2 the butcher who bleeds a calf bleeds a calf4 ,that is all4 ,and if one points out the cruelty1 injustice1 and folly of vivisection1 or sport1 or flesh-eating1 appeal is instantly made to the vaunted fact that man is 8royal0 and the human race 8a society06 ,,viii ,,the ,,animal ,,question ,,and ,,the ,,social ,,question#ei ,it is1 perhaps1 not sufficiently recognized by zoophilists how largely the ill-usage of the lower animals is due to the iniquity of present social conditions1 and how vain it is to expect to remedy the consequences without attacking the cause4 ,so long as pecuniary profit and self-interest are accepted as the guiding principles of trade1 it will remain impossible to secure a right treatment for animals2 because it is absurd to suppose that mankind will agree to exempt the lower races from the results of an economic tyranny of which men also are the victims4 ,if the worship of the great god 8,profit0 bears so hardly on men and women1 is it likely that the result of this pitiless struggle will be less disastrous to the animals1 who by most people are not regarded as fellow-beings at all8 ,let us take a few instances4 ,the over-working of horses is one of the commonest and worst forms of ill-treatment to which domestic animals are liable1 and is justly punishable by law when 8cruelty0--that somewhat vague offence--can be proved4 ,but such proof1 except in flagrant cases1 is rendered practically impossible by the fact that1 for the sake of employers' profits1 men and women are daily over-worked quite as cruelly as horses are4 ,if tramway companies are permitted to work their men long and shameful hours to swell the shareholders' dividends1 what can be done for the horses8 ,and where there is actual ill-usage of horses by those who have charge of them1 it must be remembered that the men's ill-temper is often the result of the harsh conditions under which they work4 ,selfishness begets its like1 and the sufferers by a harsh system will in turn treat other sufferers harshly4 ,again1 why is it that so many persons are engaged in trades that involve cruelty to animals8 ,obviously because the present conditions of society leave them no choice4 ,one man must be a slaughterman1 another a cattle drover1 another a bird-catcher1 because no other occupation happens to be open to him1 and he naturally chooses to ill-treat animals rather than to starve himself4 ,economic necessity leaves no scope for humaneness4 ,before we fairly condemn the brutal drover1 or sealer1 or bird-catcher1 we must so reconstitute society as to ensure to each citizen a decent and humane livelihood4 ,it is idle to preach humanity to those who themselves live in ever-present fear of the hunger-wolf4 ,in like manner 8sport10 in its baser forms1 is maintained and perpetuated by bad social conditions4 ,it was the 8hangers on0 of the ,royal ,buckhounds who made it so difficult to abolish that disreputable institution2 tame stags must still be worried that local 8trade0 may be encouraged2 and that rich idlers may come into the hunting districts to spend their wealth4 ,so1 too1 the blackguardly pastimes of rabbit-coursing and pigeon-shooting are mainly supported by the betting and gambling element1 which thrives in proportion as honest work is underpaid4 ,nor is it to be wondered that many individuals of all classes should become gamblers and rogues1 when the principle of commercial enterprise is what it is--an utterly immoral desire to make money by the quickest possible method1 and without the slightest consideration for any interests but one's own4 ,in this breakneck competition everything must be done at high pressure1 or the margin of 8profit0 will be lost4 ,it is horrible1 is it not1 that the slaughterman should sometimes skin the sheep alive8 ,but time is money2 and the slaughterman may himself be the victim of some skinflint employer1 and perhaps he is anxious to rise to eminence in his profession and give his children a real ,christian bringing up4 ,thus1 too1 the master-butchers have opposed the abolition of private slaughter-houses because their 8profits0 would be lessened4 ,it costs more to have the best and most modern appliances--so humanity once more has had to wait4 ,the moral is that zoophilists1 while in no wise relaxing their efforts for the welfare of the animals1 should also range themselves on the side of social reform4 ,and this suggests the remark that the sub-title of this book is not devoid of significance1 for it is when they are 8considered in relation to social progress0 that the rights of animals are most likely to be understood4 ,,bibliography#fj 8,free ,thoughts upon the ,brute ,creation40 ,by ,john ,hildrop1 ,m4,a4 ,london1 #agdb4 ,this examination of ,father ,bougeant's 8,philosophical ,amusement upon the ,language of ,beasts0 7#agdj7 is an argument in favour of animal immortality4 8,a ,reasonable ,plea for the ,animal ,creation40 ,by ,robert ,morris4 ,london1 #agdf4 ,a reprint of some letters urging that 8we have no right to destroy1 much less to eat of any thing which has life40 8,an ,essay on the ,future ,life of ,brutes40 ,by ,richard ,dean4 ,manchester1 #agfg4 ,the probability of a future life for animals is asserted on scriptural and other grounds4 8,an ,apology for the ,brute ,creation1 or ,abuse of ,animals ,censured40 ,by ,james ,granger4 ,london1 #aggb4 ,a short sermon condemning cruelty to animals in sport1 etc4 8,a ,dissertation on the ,duty of ,mercy and ,sin of ,cruelty to ,brute ,animals40 ,by ,humphry ,primatt1 ,d4,d4 ,london1 #aggf4 ,a quaint but excellent book1 urging1 as a rule of conduct1 8to do unto others as1 in their condition1 you would be done unto40 8,disquisitions on ,several ,subjects40 ,by ,soame ,jenyns4 ,london1 #aghb4 ,chapter ,,ii treats of 8,cruelty to ,inferior ,animals40 8,introduction to the ,principles of ,morals and ,legislation40 ,by ,jeremy ,bentham4 ,london1 #aghj4 ,bentham's works contain several passages asserting the rights of animals4 ,his views1 ridiculed by ,dr4 ,whewell1 were supported by ,j4 ,s4 ,mill1 8,dissertations and ,discussions10 ii1 pp4 #dhb-dhe4 8,the ,cry of ,nature1 or ,an ,appeal to ,mercy and ,justice on behalf of the ,persecuted ,animals40 ,by ,john ,oswald4 ,london1 #agia4 ,written to advocate the discontinuance of flesh-eating4 8,a ,vindication of the ,rights of ,brutes40 ,london1 #agib4 ,attributed to ,thomas ,taylor4 7,see above1 p4 #d47 8,a ,philosophical ,treatise on ,horses1 and on the ,moral ,duties of ,man towards the ,brute ,creation40 ,by ,john ,lawrence4 ,two vols4 ,london1 #agif-agih4 ,the author of this humane book was a farmer1 an authority on the management of domestic animals1 who was consulted by ,richard ,martin1 ,m4,p41 on the details of his ,ill-treatment of ,cattle ,bill1 which became law in #ahbb4 8,on the ,conduct of ,man to ,inferior ,animals40 ,by ,george ,nicholson4 ,manchester1 #agig4 ,a compilation of passages illustrating man's cruelty to the lower races4 8,an ,essay on ,humanity to ,animals40 ,by ,thomas ,young1 ,fellow of ,trinity ,college1 ,cambridge4 ,london1 #agih4 ,the book contains chapters on sport1 cruelties connected with the table1 etc4 8,the ,hare1 or ,hunting ,incompatible with ,humanity40 ,dublin1 #ahjj4 ,a story1 by an anonymous writer1 purporting to be told by a ,hare4 8,zoophilos40 ,by ,henry ,crowe4 ,buckingham1 #ahai4 ,contains chapters on sport1 methods of slaughter for food1 vivisection1 etc4 8,moral ,inquiries on the ,situation of ,man and of ,brutes40 ,by ,lewis ,gompery4 ,london1 #ahbd4 ,the author of this book was secretary of the ,society for the ,prevention of ,cruelty to ,animals1 and founder of an ,animals' ,friend ,society4 ,a later volume1 8,fragments in ,defence of ,animals10 was published by him in #aheb4 8,the ,rights of ,animals1 and ,man's ,obligation to treat them with ,humanity40 ,by ,william ,h4 ,drummond1 ,d4,d4 ,london1 #ahch4 ,a guarded essay1 in which the writer pleads for the restriction of vivisection1 but justifies flesh-eating and field-sports4 8,philozoia1 or ,moral ,reflections on the ,actual ,condition of the ,animal ,kingdom1 and the means of improving the same40 ,by ,t4 ,forster4 ,brussels1 #ahci4 ,a plea for humane education4 ,a section of the book is devoted to the condition of animals on the ,continent4 8,the ,obligation and ,extent of ,humanity to ,brutes1 principally considered with reference to the ,domesticated ,animals40 ,by ,w4 ,youatt4 ,london1 #ahci4 ,the writer1 a ,professor in the ,royal ,veterinary ,college1 was a member of the ,society for the ,prevention of ,cruelty to ,animals4 8,the ,morality of ,field ,sports40 ,by ,professor ,e4 ,a4 ,freeman1 8,fortnightly ,review10 ,october1 #ahfi4 ,this article1 together with a reply by ,anthony ,trollope and a rejoinder by ,prof4 ,freeman1 was reprinted 7#aijj71 under the title of 8,the ,morality of ,hunting10 by ,mr4 ,r4 ,k4 ,gaye1 of ,trinity ,college1 ,cambridge4 8,some ,talk about ,animals and their ,masters40 ,by ,sir ,arthur ,helps4 ,london1 #ahgc4 ,this popular little book contains many good remarks1 but does not advance any consistent view of the question4 8,the ,rights of an ,animal1 a ,new ,essay in ,ethics40 ,by ,edward ,byron ,nicholson4 ,london1 #ahgi4 ,this book1 with much interesting information1 includes a reprint of a chapter by ,john ,lawrence on 8,the ,rights of ,beasts40 8,the ,ethics of ,diet1 a ,catena of ,authorities ,deprecatory of the ,habit of ,flesh-,eating40 ,by ,howard ,williams4 ,london and ,manchester1 #ahhc4 ,though written primarily from a vegetarian standpoint1 this scholarly work contains a large amount of general information invaluable to students of the animal question4 8,animals' ,rights1 considered in relation to ,social ,progress40 ,by ,henry ,s4 ,salt4 ,london1 #ahib4 8,moral ,philosophy40 ,by ,joseph ,rickaby1 ,s4,j4 ,london1 #ahib4 ,contains a statement of the ,catholic position in denial of rights to animals4 8,natural ,rights40 ,by ,david ,g4 ,ritchie4 ,london1 #ahie4 ,see above1 ,appendix ,i4 8,the ,new ,charter1 a discussion of the ,rights of ,men and the ,rights of ,animals40 ,essays published by the ,humanitarian ,league4 ,london1 #ahif4 8,evolutional ,ethics and ,animal ,psychology40 ,by ,e4 ,p4 ,evans4 ,london1 #ahih4 8,the ,nature and ,development of ,animal ,intelligence40 ,by ,wesley ,mills1 ,m4,d4 ,london1 #ahih4 8,kith and ,kin3 ,poems of ,animal ,life40 ,edited by ,henry ,s4 ,salt4 ,london1 #aija4 8,every ,living ,creature40 ,by ,ralph ,waldo ,trine4 ,london1 #aija4 8,the ,basis of ,morality40 ,by ,arthur ,schopenhauer4 ,translated by ,a4 ,b4 ,bullock4 ,london1 #aijc4 8,the ,universal ,kinship40 ,by ,j4 ,howard ,moore4 ,london1 #aijf4 ,this brilliantly written work asserts the scientific basis of humanitarianism1 and treats of the subject of animals' rights under three heads--the physical1 the psychical1 and the ethical kinship between human and sub-human4 8,the ,new ,ethics40 ,by ,j4 ,howard ,moore4 ,london1 #aijg4 8,the ,church and ,kindness to ,animals40 ,london1 #aijg4 ,a translation from the ,french1 8,l'glise et la ,piti envers les ,animaux0 7#aijc71 in vindication of the ,catholic ,church against the charge of indifference to animal suffering4 8,the ,place of ,animals in ,human ,thought40 ,by the ,countess ,martinengo ,cesaresco4 ,london1 #aiji4 ,a work of value to those who are studying the psychological aspect of the question4 8,the ,mahatma and the ,hare40 ,by ,h4 ,rider ,haggard4 ,london1 #aiaa4 8,killing for ,sport40 ,by various writers1 edited by ,henry ,s4 ,salt1 with ,introduction by ,g4 ,bernard ,shaw4 ,london1 #aiae4 ,the ,publications of the ,humanitarian ,league--,pamphlets on various subjects1 #ahia-aiai4 8,suffering and ,wrong4 ,the ,message of the ,new ,religion40 ,by ,francis ,wood4 ,london1 #aiaf4 8,savage ,survivals40 ,by ,j4 ,howard ,moore4 ,london1 #aiaf4 8,the ,great ,kinship40 ,an ,anthology of ,humanitarian ,poetry1 edited by ,bertram ,lloyd4 ,london1 #aiba4 8,the ,soul of an ,animal40 ,by ,t4 ,s4 ,hawkins4 ,london1 #aiba4 ,,index4 ,aberdare1 ,lord1 on ,vivisection1 #gc 7note #da74 ,aristotle1 quoted1 #ag4 ,arnold1 ,dr41 quoted1 #ae4 ,bentham1 ,jeremy1 on rights1 #e1 #ad1 #ag1 #db4 8,better for the animals themselves10 #bd1 #be1 #cg1 #df1 #eb1 #gb1 #gc 7note #da74 ,bright1 ,john1 quoted1 #hf4 ,bchner1 quoted1 #hc4 ,caged animals1 #cf-ci4 ,caging of birds1 #ci4 ,cartesian doctrine1 #aj1 #aa4 ,castration of animals1 #cj1 #ca4 ,cattle traffic1 #db1 #de4 ,chesterfield1 ,lord1 quoted1 #dc4 ,church1 the1 and rights of animals1 #c4 ,cobbe1 ,frances ,power1 #h1 #gj1 #ga4 ,comte1 ,auguste1 #bd 7note #ag74 ,cruelty to animals1 causes of1 #h-aj1 #af2 responsibility for1 #ei2 forms of1 #ge1 #gh4 ,darwin1 quoted1 #ab4 ,democracy and rights of animals1 #d1 #bc1 #bd1 #he1 #hf4 ,dixie1 ,lady ,f41 quoted1 #eg4 8,domestic0 animals1 protected by law1 #bf4 8,dumb0 animals1 an objectionable term1 #ad1 #ae4 ,education1 as a method of reform1 #hf-hi4 ,erskine1 ,lord1 quoted1 #ij4 ,evans1 ,e4 ,p41 quoted1 #ab-ad4 ,feather trade1 #fc1 #fd4 ,flesh-eating1 #db-dg4 ,food question1 importance of1 #da4 ,fur trade1 #ei-fc4 ,gompertz1 ,lewis1 quoted1 #be 7note #ai74 ,helps1 ,sir ,a41 #bg4 ,huxley1 #aj 7note #aa74 ,immortality of animals1 #i1 #aj1 #ab4 ,jenyns1 ,soame1 quoted1 #cf1 #eb4 ,kropotkine1 ,p41 #bj 7note #af74 ,law for preventing cruelty to animals1 need of amendment1 #ee-eg4 ,lawrence1 ,john1 quoted1 #e1 #f1 #bf1 #bg1 #db4 ,lecky's 8,history of ,european ,morals10 #i1 #ae1 #af4 ,legislation1 as a method of reform1 #hi-ia4 ,machinery1 use of1 #bi4 8,martin's ,act10 #f1 #cd1 #ef1 #ij4 ,michelet1 quoted1 #dd1 #ec1 #ed1 #fi4 ,mill1 ,j4 ,s41 quoted1 #ia4 ,mills1 ,dr4 ,wesley1 #ab1 #ac4 ,montaigne1 #bg4 ,more1 ,sir ,t41 on sport1 #ed4 ,natural history1 true method and false1 #fg-fi4 ,nature1 and struggle for existence1 #ai1 #bj1 #dg1 #hj1 #ha4 ,necessity1 plea of1 #gb1 #gi4 ,nicholson1 ,e4 ,b41 quoted1 #cg1 #df4 ,nomenclature1 influence of1 #ad1 #ae4 ,pain1 the 8discipline0 of1 #ai4 ,paine1 ,thomas1 #d4 ,paley1 ,dr4 ,w41 quoted1 #dc4 ,performing ,animals1 #dj4 8,pets10 #cb4 ,pheasant-shooting1 #eg4 ,plutarch1 #bh4 ,porphyry1 #c1 #ba4 8,preservation0 of animals1 by sportsmen1 #ea1 #eb2 by collectors1 #fh4 ,primatt1 ,dr4 ,h41 #i1 #ai1 #bf1 #gg1 #gh4 ,property1 influence on legislation1 #cd1 #ce4 ,rabbit-coursing1 #ef4 ,reason and instinct1 #ab1 #ac4 ,rights1 definition1 #a1 #b2 need of a clear principle1 #g1 #gh1 #gi4 ,ritchie1 ,d4 ,g41 #b1 #c1 #g4 ,romanes1 ,professor1 #aj4 ,rousseau1 #c1 #hh4 ,scientists and the rights of animals1 #fg-gj4 ,schopenhauer1 quoted1 #aa1 #ad1 #db4 ,seal ,fishery1 #fc4 ,slavery1 #af1 #ag4 ,spencer1 ,herbert1 on rights1 #b4 ,sport1 as related to other cruelties1 #ej1 #ea1 #fe1 #ff1 #gd2 excuses for1 #ec2 zest of1 #ed1 #ee4 ,stag-hunting1 #ee4 ,strauss1 quoted1 #hc4 ,thomson1 ,j4 ,arthur1 quoted1 #bj 7note #af74 ,thoreau1 #bg1 #bi1 #di1 #fh4 ,vegetarianism1 #dd1 #dh1 #di4 8,vermin10 treatment of1 #ef1 #eg4 ,vivisection1 its iniquity1 #fi1 #gj 7note #ci72 relation to other cruelties1 #fg1 #gj1 #gd2 morality of1 #ga1 #gc2 right method of combating1 #ge1 #gf4 ,voltaire1 #c1 #aj4 ,wild animals1 unprotected by law1 #bf1 #cd-cf2 sanctuaries for1 #dj1 #ee4 ,wood1 ,rev4 ,j4 ,g41 quoted1 #ab4 ,wordsworth1 quoted1 #ea4 ,zoological ,gardens1 #ch4 ,,chiswick ,,press3 ,,charles ,,whittingham ,,and ,,co4 ,,tooks ,,court1 ,,chancery ,,lane1 ,,london4 ,,footnotes3 #a ,an admirable definition of ,rights is given by ,mr4 ,g4 ,w4 ,foote in his contribution to 8,the ,new ,charter03 8,rights are of three sorts--legal1 moral1 and natural4 ,the legal meaning of #8,rights' is undoubtedly the primary one 444 and this is the only definite sense1 in which the word can be used4444 ,moral ,rights are widespread new sentiments1 demanding incorporation into ,legal ,rights2 and ,natural ,rights are still newer sentiments1 aspiring to recognition as ,moral ,rights1 with a view to ultimate incorporation as ,legal ,rights4444 ,they are respectively1 a solid fact1 a general demand1 and a growing aspiration40 #b ,this remark implies not the 8disparagement of logic and of all careful use of language10 with which ,professor ,d4 ,g4 ,ritchie has charged me in his book on 8,natural ,rights10 but simply that social reformers cannot be debarred from using the best available terms because no logically exact term is forthcoming4 ,see ,appendix ,i4 #c ,attributed to ,thomas ,taylor1 the ,platonist4 #d 8,principles of ,penal ,law10 chap1 xvi41 #aghj4 #e ,john ,lawrence1 8,philosophical ,treatise on the ,moral ,duties of ,man towards the ,brute ,creation10 #agif4 #f ,professor ,ritchie contends in his 8,natural ,rights0 that domestic animals have not been granted rights in ,english law4 8,because a work of art1 or some ancient monument1 is protected by law from injury1 do we speak of the rights of pictures or stones80 ,but the distinction is obvious--works of art are protected only as property1 domestic animals as sentient beings1 whether owned or unowned4 #g 8,fraser10 ,november1 #ahfc2 8,the ,rights of ,man and the ,claims of ,brutes10 by ,frances ,power ,cobbe4 #h 8,book of ,thoughts1 ,memories1 and ,fancies10 #ahed4 #i ,humphry ,primatt1 ,d4,d41 author of 8,the ,duty of ,mercy to ,brute ,animals0 7#aggf74 #aj ,see the article on 8,animal ,immortality10 8,the ,nineteenth ,century10 ,jan41 #ahia1 by ,norman ,pearson4 ,the upshot of his argument is that1 8if we accept the immortality of the human soul1 and also accept its evolutional origin1 we cannot deny the survival1 in some form or other1 of animal minds40 #aa ,prof4 ,huxley's remarks1 in 8,science and ,culture10 give a partial support to ,descartes' theory1 but do not bear on the moral question of rights4 ,for1 though he concludes that animals are probably 8sensitive automata10 he classes men in the same category4 ,see ,appendix ,,ii4 #ab ,schopenhauer's 8,foundation of ,morality40 ,i quote the passage as translated in ,mr4 ,howard ,williams's 8,ethics of ,diet40 #ac 8,descent of ,man10 chap4 iii4 #ad 8,man and ,beast1 here and hereafter10 #ahgd4 #ae ,in ,sir ,a4 ,helps's 8,animals and their ,masters40 ,see an article on 8,dumb ,animals10 in 8,the ,humanitarian10 ,november1 #aiab4 ,also the chapter on 8,speech as a ,barrier between ,man and ,beast10 in ,mr4 ,e4 ,p4 ,evans's work on 8,evolutional ,ethics and ,animal ,psychology10 #ahih4 #af ,see ,prince ,kropotkine's articles on 8,mutual ,aid among ,animals10 8,nineteenth ,century10 #ahij1 where the conclusion is arrived at that 8sociability is as much a law of nature as mutual struggle40 ,a similar view is expressed in the 8,study of ,animal ,life10 #ahib1 by ,j4 ,arthur ,thomson4 8,what we must protest against10 he says1 in an interesting chapter on 8,the ,struggle of ,life10 8is that one-sided interpretation according to which individualistic competition is nature's sole method of progress40 ,another and more recent work1 which has a very important bearing on this question1 is 8,symbiosis3 a ,socio-,physiological ,study of ,evolution10 by ,h4 ,reinheimer1 #aibj4 #ag ,auguste ,comte included the domestic animals as an organic part of the ,positivist conception of humanity4 #ah 8,moral ,duty towards ,animals10 8,macmillan's ,magazine10 ,april1 #ahhb1 by the then ,bishop of ,carlisle4 #ai ,see ,lewis ,gompertz' 8,moral ,inquiries0 7#ahbd71 where it is argued that 8at least in the present state of society it is unjust1 and considering the unnecessary abuse they suffer from being in the power of man1 it is wrong to use them1 and to encourage their being placed in his power40 #bj 8,animals and their ,masters10 p4 #aja4 #ba ,see ,appendix ,,iii4 #bb ,under the ,animals 7,anaesthetics7 ,act1 #aiai1 an ansthetic is now required in certain cases1 but the scope of the ,act needs to be greatly enlarged4 #bc ,the use of dogs for purposes of draught was prohibited in ,london in #ahci1 and in #ahed this enactment was extended to the whole kingdom4 #bd 8,on ,cruelty to the ,inferior ,animals10 by ,soame ,jenyns1 #aghb4 #be ,mr4 ,e4 ,b4 ,nicholson4 ,see ,appendix ,,iv4 #bf ,unfortunately they are not of much value even for that purpose1 owing to the deterioration of health and vigour caused by their imprisonment4 8,the skeletons of aged carnivora10 says ,dr4 ,w4 ,b4 ,carpenter1 8are often good for nothing as museum specimens1 their bones being rickety and distorted40 #bg 8,la ,bible de l',humanit40 #bh ,see the ,humanitarian ,league pamphlets on 8,cattle-ships10 and 8,the ,reform of the ,slaughter-house40 #bi 8,the ,rights of an ,animal10 #ahgi4 #cj ,edward ,carpenter1 8,england's ,ideal40 #ca ,as in the article by ,sir ,herbert ,maxwell on 8,our ,obligations to ,wild ,animals10 8,blackwood's ,magazine10 ,august1 #ahii4 #cb ,soame ,jenyns1 #aghb4 #cc ,see the chapter on ,fallacies of ,sportsmen in the volume of essays entitled 8,killing for ,sport0 7,george ,bell and ,sons1 #aiae74 ,several of the sophisms by which fox-hunting is commonly defended were employed by ,dr4 ,lang1 ,archbishop of ,york1 in an address which he gave 7,november #af1 #aiac7 when dedicating a stained window to the memory of a deceased blood-sportsman4 #cd 8,the ,horrors of ,sport10 ,humanitarian ,league pamphlet1 by ,lady ,florence ,dixie4 #ce 8,it is extremely difficult to see why these tame deer of park and paddock should not be held to be domestic animals within the meaning of the ,acts for the ,prevention of ,cruelty to ,animals4 ,indeed1 if they have ceased to be fer natur they must be domestic animals1 unless there be some miserable tertium quid which is neither one nor the other4 ,i am not aware that there ever has been a definite decision of the ,high ,court upon this matter1 and ,i venture to think that if a suitable case were to be taken up and properly argued1 it is possible that a judgment welcome to humanitarians might be obtained40--,sir ,george ,greenwood 78,humane ,review10 ,january1 #aijh74 #cf ,letter to 8,pall ,mall ,gazette10 ,march #bdth1 #ahib1 by ,lady ,florence ,dixie4 #cg ,since this was written1 more than thirty years ago1 there has been a welcome growth of public feeling1 resulting in a better control of the plumage trade4 #ch ,see ,appendix ,v4 #ci ,we are told that in this country such barbarities are no longer possible1 because1 by the ,act of #ahgf1 vivisections may be performed by none but licensed persons1 and the use of anaesthetics is made obligatory4 ,it has to be remembered1 however1 that special licences can be obtained to dispense with anaesthetics1 or1 if an ansthetic be administered1 to allow the vivisector to keep the animal alive after the effect of the ansthetic has passed away1 in order to watch the results of the experiment1 during which period the animal frequently has to endure great suffering4 #dj ,on the reference to this passage in 8,the ,confessions of a ,physician10 by ,v4 ,veresaeff1 see ,appendix ,,vi4 #da ,it is said that the first ,lord ,aberdare1 in presiding over a meeting of the ,royal ,society for the ,prevention of ,cruelty to ,animals1 and in warning the society against entering on an anti-vivisection crusade1 gave utterance to the delightfully irrelevant remark that he had himself been thrice operated on1 and was all the better for it6 #db ,see ,j4 ,cotter ,morrison's article on 8,scientific versus ,bucolic ,vivisection10 8,fortnightly ,review10 #ahhe4 #dc ,professor ,jevons1 8,fortnightly ,review10 #ahgf4 #dd 8,mind in ,animals10 translated by ,annie ,besant4 #de 8,the ,old ,faith and the ,new40 #df ,see ,appendix ,,vii4 #dg ,see ,appendix ,,viii4 #dh 8,they tell children1 perhaps1 that they must not be cruel to animals4444 ,what avails all the fine talk about morality1 in contrast with acts of barbarism and immorality presented to them on all sides80--,gustav von ,struve4 #di 8,principles of ,political ,economy40 #ej ,see p4 #c4 #ea ,see p4 #aj4 #eb ,see p4 #bi4 #ec ,see p4 #cg4 #ed ,see p4 #fi4 #ee ,see p4 #ga4 #ef ,from the translation by ,simeon ,linden1 ,london1 #aijd2 pp4 #aeh1 #aei4 #eg ,see p4 #hd4 #eh ,daily ,news1 ,april #aj1 #aijf4 #ei ,see p4 #hf4 #fj ,it has not been attempted in the following pages to give a complete bibliography of the doctrine of ,animals' ,rights1 but merely a list of some of the chief works1 in ,english1 that touch directly on that subject4 ,,transcriber',s ,,notes3 ,italicized text is surrounded by underscores3 italics4 ,obvious typographical errors have been corrected4 ,inconsistencies in hyphenation have been standardized4 ,alternate or archaic spelling has been retained from the original4