Editing Vivisection (section)

===== David Ferrier and the Cruelty to Animals Act 1876 =====
[[File:Frog vivisection.jpg|thumb|Prior to vivisection for educational purposes, [[chloroform]] was administered as an [[anesthetic]] to this [[Common Sand Frog|common sand frog]].]]
The [[Cruelty to Animals Act, 1876]] in Britain determined that one could only conduct vivisection on animals with the appropriate license from the state, and that the work the physiologist was doing had to be original and absolutely necessary.<ref name=":2">{{Cite journal|last1=Finn|first1=Michael A.|last2=Stark|first2=James F.|date=2015-02-01|title=Medical science and the Cruelty to Animals Act 1876: A re-examination of anti-vivisectionism in provincial Britain|url=http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/83097/3/Vivisection_Studies_FINAL_REVISIED_VERSION_October_2014.pdf|journal=Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences|volume=49|pages=12–23|doi=10.1016/j.shpsc.2014.10.007|pmid=25437634|access-date=2019-09-23|archive-date=2020-11-23|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201123170036/http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/83097/3/Vivisection_Studies_FINAL_REVISIED_VERSION_October_2014.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref> The stage was set for such legislation by physiologist [[David Ferrier]]. Ferrier was a pioneer in understanding the brain and used animals to show that certain locales of the brain corresponded to bodily movement elsewhere in the body in 1873. He put these animals to sleep, and caused them to move unconsciously with a probe. Ferrier was successful, but many decried his use of animals in his experiments. Some of these arguments came from a religious standpoint. Some were concerned that Ferrier's experiments would separate God from the mind of man in the name of science.<ref name=":2" /> Some of the anti-vivisection movement in England had its roots in Evangelicalism and Quakerism. These religions already had a distrust for science, only intensified by the recent publishing of Darwin's Theory of Evolution in 1859.<ref name=":1" />

Neither side was pleased with how the Cruelty to Animals Act 1876 was passed. The scientific community felt as though the government was restricting their ability to compete with the quickly advancing France and Germany with new regulations. The anti-vivisection movement was also unhappy, but because they believed that it was a concession to scientists for allowing vivisection to continue at all.<ref name=":2" /> Ferrier would continue to vex the anti-vivisection movement in Britain with his experiments when he had a debate with his German opponent, Friedrich Goltz. They would effectively enter the vivisection arena, with Ferrier presenting a monkey, and Goltz presenting a dog, both of which had already been operated on. Ferrier won the debate, but did not have a license, leading the anti-vivisection movement to sue him in 1881. Ferrier was not found guilty, as his assistant was the one operating, and his assistant did have a license.<ref name=":2" /> Ferrier and his practices gained public support, leaving the anti-vivisection movement scrambling. They made the moral argument that given recent developments, scientists would venture into more extreme practices to operating on "the cripple, the mute, the idiot, the convict, the pauper, to enhance the 'interest' of [the physiologist's] experiments".<ref name=":2" />