[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 54.197.65.227. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Article
November 28, 1903

A RIGHTEOUS VERDICT AGAINST AN ANTIVIVISECTIONIST.

JAMA. 1903;XLI(22):1351. doi:10.1001/jama.1903.02490410041007

This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.

Abstract

We have frequently called attention to the exaggerated statements and outrageous lies—no milder term will suffice—of the antivivisectionists, both in this country and in England, and to the uselessness, for this reason, of attempting to answer any of their so-called arguments. They make malicious and vindictive statements and these are reiterated in both countries, no matter who may be injured thereby, or whether or not they have been proved false. Without referring to more than one case, we cite that of Sir Frederick Treves, who has been, and still is, quoted as holding to views that he has repeatedly and publicly denied.

Last week in London, after a trial before Baron Alverstone, Lord Chief Justice of England, a verdict of $10,000 damages was rendered against one of the leading antivivisectionists of England—an event that, it is to be hoped, will have a tendency to check the zoöphiles in their "lust

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview
×