NOTES OF THE MONTH.

Globe, Volume IV, Issue 364, 12 August 1875, Page 4

NOTES OF THE MONTH.

(From the Spectator , May Bth.) There has been another “scare” at Paris this week, arising from the great prevalence of the belief that “ something is brewing,” and that after the interview between the Czar and the Emperor of Germany the die will be cast for peace or war. There is no doubt that there is a German War party, which thinks that France has not been crippled and ought to be crippled; that the £200,000,000 fine was not nearly enough ; that Belfort ought to be taken, and France to be fined another £400,000,000, to be paid in twenty yearly instalments, with 5 per cent interest accumulating on it, without power of anticipating payment ; and that if France would not agree to these modest proposals, Paris should be besieged and taken again. There is no doubt, too, that the French are possessed with the belief that the war party will sooner or later carry their way. They hold that Russia is the only Power which stands between them and the deliberate rupture of the treaty by the German War party, and they fear that if the Czar, when sounded, seems indifferent the Emperor of Germany will soon be carried away by the violence of the war party. That Russia holds a commanding position in relation to further German expansions, we do not doubt. But we do doubt whether her influence in the matter is really needed lo restrain the Emperor of Germany from a new “attack on France founded solely on the calculation of future danger from French intentions. There may be a sort of wisdom in conquest and annexation; but the wisdom of crippling by conquest and plunder, only in order to repeat the conquest and double the dose of plunder, within short periodic times, must be ques tionable, even in the eyes of military Kings, Yet France is in a genuine panic, and the Stock Exchange yesterday proved it. At about 3.30 p.m. the weaker stocks fell suddenly about 1 per cent. On May 2nd Lord Henniker laid on the table of the House of Lords a Bill for the regulation of the practice of Vivisection, which ought to receive the earnest support of those who have been dismayed by the rapid spread of that practice abroad, and recently even in England. It renders all vivisection— i.e., all experiments on vertebrate animals for physiological or pathological purposes, but not, of course, for purposes of humanity to the creatures themselves —unlawful, except in places specially registered for that purpose. All vivisections in these registered places are to be performed completely under anaesthetics, unless a special license for the performance of experiments not under anaesthetics has been procured, and for every such license, which, unless renewed, expires in six months, a lee of ten pounds is to be paid. A Justice of the Peace may, after receiving an affirmation on oath that there is reasonable ground to believe that vivisections are performed in places not registered for that purpose, issue a warrant authorising a search of the suspected premises. We observe that in certain quarters it is alleged that Lord Henniker’s Bill is to be countermined by a Bill prepared by the physiologists, and prepared, we suppose, in the interests of the friends of vivisection. We trust this report may be groundless. One thing is certain—the public will distrust the physio legists even though they “ bring gifts.” The physiologists would do better for their own interests to accept Lord Henniker’s Bill, and endeavor to amend it where they think it unduly injurious to science, than by bringing forward a measure of their own, which will be suspected—not unjustly, we imagine, we certainly should suspect it—of the original taint of not aiming at restriction so much as protection for this practice. We trust that a great effort may be made in both Houses to support Lord Henniker in the great work he is undertaking, and that the Government itself may lend a helping hand.