H. O'Brien- No links match your filters. Clear Filters
-
CreatedH. O'Brien, 'Monkeys - Exporters' License. Mr. N. Edwards', 26th June, 1958 (DO 35/8640).
26 Jun 1958
Description:'CONFIDENTIAL
REFERENCE: 1022/15
MONKEYS - EXPORTERS' LICENCE
MR N. EDWARDS
...
2. Mr. Edwards said that he had supplied the Medical Research Council in England with animals, including monkeys of Pakistan origin. He says he knows Dr Lane Petter [sic] personally and that the latter approved of the object of his visit to this country, but felt that the M.R.C. would have to keep well clear of the business, for fear of getting involved in anything which might interrupt the flow of monkeys to the British vaccine manufacturers. Mr Edwards had a letter signed by Dr Lane Petter.
3. Mr Edwards has travelled round the areas where monkeys are trapped. He has spoken to the trappers and to the middle men, and has had discussions with Mr Rao of Vitae (who does not yet know that Mr Edwards is thinking of getting into the Monkey business). He has come to the conclusion that excessive costs are being incurred and profits being made in the supply of monkeys to the United Kingdom. He says that a monkey, for which a trapper is paid Rs. 1/- by the middle man in a jungle village, costs £20 delivered to London. He also thinks that the conditions in which the monkeys travel from the jungles up to the farms of the exporting companies should and could be improved, since the limited number of exporters have a firm grip on the trade and need not, if they were sufficiently scrupulous, accept from the middle men any monkeys which had not been properly cared for en route from the jungle.
4. He believes that he could establish a farm near Lucknow, to which place the monkeys would have a much shorter journey from the jungles than their present journey to Delhi, which sometimes takes well over a day by rail. He thinks the monkeys could be flown to destinations abroad direct from Lucknow, but, even if this is not feasible, the monkeys could be kept in much better conditions were they to be flown in on a feeder air service from Lucknow to Delhi, and there trans-shipped to their final destination.
5. On the question of air freight, Mr Edwards was very critical of the charges made by B.O.A.C. and K.L.M. These people charge between £6/7,000 for the normal freighter (which carried, under the old regulation, 1,200 monkeys). U.K. private charter companies have offered to do the job for £2,000 and even the American company, Seaboard Western, would charge only £3,000.
6. As regards capital, Mr Edwards has immediately available up to £10,000, but he thinks he might need £15,000 to set up his organisation. He thinks that finance would be forthcoming from the British users of monkeys once he demonstrated that he could deliver the goods. He has no doubt that he could deliver the goods, in far better condition than the existing suppliers. 16.8% of monkeys landed in England, he says, are lost, and these losses can almost all be attributed to bad handling and delays in transit between the jungle and the users in Britain. The monkey in the jungle, he maintains, is almost invariably in first-class condition, and if that same monkey can be quickly and efficiently transferred to the users' establishments in England, where conditions leave nothing to be desired, losses would be eliminated.
7. He is thinking of asking Brigadier Dillon to act as his "front" here in Delhi. He would send out his own men to organise the purchase and care of the monkeys and will be careful to have nothing to do with the existing farms ...
...
9. Mr Edwards had two items of news for us. He had learnt when visiting the trappers and the middle men that certain Russian representatives had been touring the jungles, apparently with the idea of setting up their own supply lines.
10. He also said that the Daily Express had recently sent out a reporter to India to make a study of this monkey business and that the reporter was now back in England, having written an article which "blow the roof off the business" and would give evidence that 24 Indian M.P.s were taking bribes in connection with this business. Mr McIntosh indicated that the publication of such an article would not be helpful.'
-
CreatedH. O'Brien, 'Pfizers', 3rd February, 1960 (DO 35/8640).
3 Feb 1960
Description:'PFIZERS
Mr. Stack of Pfizers (British Branch) called this morning to renew old acquaintance. Unlike his previous visit in 1958, this time he was not calling on us for assistance.
Since the export of monkeys resumed, Pfizers in the U.K. have been doing business only with Vitas. Recent shipments of Rhesus monkeys from Delhi to Pfizers have been sizeable. The shipment leaving today consisted of 1,600 monkeys, and orders have been placed for 500 each in March, April, May, and June of this year.
Mr. Stack says he considers the monkey export market to be divided up roughly as follows:-
Vitas 75%
Pattersons 20%
Malhotra 5%
...
Mr. Stack considers Vitas are now really organised. The case against them which has been pending for years (which was a charge of dumping a cargo of dead and dying monkeys at the Puranakela) has finally been dismissed. An indication of their confidence and efficiency is that they are proposing to give a 100% arrival guarantee to purchasers, which means that purchasers will only pay for the actual number of live monkeys received at their premises.
One interesting piece of information given to Mr. Stack by Vitas was that the U.S.S.R., to which country Vitas sell in quantity, expect to buy 10,000 monkeys in 1960.
I asked Mr. Stack about the British Standard for monkey containers, explaining that Dr. Lane-Petter would shortly be visiting this country to talk to the Indian Government on this subject. He said that in his view it did not really matter whether the B.S.S. was adopted or not, for it differed very little from the existing arrangements. He thought that we should go fairly easy about pressing this on the Indian Government. After all, we were not getting the monkeys we required, and in this business the lesson should really be drawn from past events, to let sleeping dogs lie.''
-
SentH. O'Brien to B.D. Tims, 22nd August, 1958 (DO 35/8640).
22 Aug 1958
Description:'CONFIDENTIAL
...
2. We have had discussions with officials in the American, Canadian and German authorities on this subject. The Americans have recently made verbal representations to the Indian Government, supported by the personal testimony of two experts from Merck, Sharps and Dohme, the largest U.S.A. importers of Indian monkeys for the manufacture of polio vaccine. We understand that the Americans and the Germans are shortly to make formal representations, and the Canadian High Commission is seeking permission from Ottowa to support us. Also, the firm whose main trade in monkeys is with the U.S.S.R. tell us that the Russians have recently protested against the new regulations.
3. The Americans have used the argument that their vaccine manufacturing plant is designed to handle animals averaging a certain weight, which has been determined by the weight structure of the monkey consignments which they have hitherto been receiving from India. They say that all their delicate and precise manufacturing processes are thrown out if the average weight of the monkeys used is drastically changed - as it must be if supplies are restricted to monkeys over 6 lbs. in weight. Even if there were plentiful supplies of heavy monkeys, therefore, American production would be dislocated by the use of them.
4. Our German colleagues have received from research institutions in Germany information indicating that monkeys between 4 and 6 lbs. are superior to heavier monkeys for the preparation of poliomyelitis vaccines. I quote below the information supplied by our colleagues in the German Embassy.
"Points which speak in favour of supply of four to six pound monkeys for preparation of poliomyelitis vaccine:
1.) The testing-monkeys serve mainly as kidney-source for the preparation of monkey-kidney-tissue-cultures for the carrying out of tests with poliomyelitis-vaccine. It is desirable to have younger animals for this purpose, as the tissues of younger animals have a higher potentiality of growth in the culture. It is in correspondence with the long years experience with the scientific institutions that the kidneys of smaller animals can be kept better in culture than those of older animals. The surviving duration of the kidney cells of younger monkeys in the tissue-cultures is greater than that of kindney cells of older animals. The Institutions are of the opinion that the weight-class between four and six pounds is just right for the breeding of for a long time to be observed tissue cultures.
2.) Experimental monkeys for the harmlessness examination should not possess any immunity against poliomyelitis. Occasionally however the Institutions are finding anti-serum matter against the poliomyelitis virus in older animals while the incidence of such anti-serum matters in younger animals occurs much more seldom.
3.) The intracerebral and intraspinal vaccine-injections during the experiments are stood better with monkeys of four to six pounds weight. It appears that all wounds which such operations are causing are healing much quicker with younger animals."
The Germans are also arguing against the reduction in the number of monkeys which can be carried in a standard cage. They are proposing to make use of the following points in making a case for to the Indian Government:
"Points which speak against the present treatment-arrangements as ordered by the Indian Government and in favour of transporting younger monkeys.
...
2.) The Institutions are observing that on arrival the monkeys sit in a heap together in one corner of the cage while the remaining part of the cage is empty. The monkeys feel cold. If there would be a sufficient number, say at least ten to twelve in a cage, the monkeys would feel much more happy and comfortable".
...'
-
SentH. O'Brien to M.R. Simmons, 15th March, 1958 (DO 35/8639).
15 Mar 1958
Description:'Dear Miss Simmons,
I refer to the recently imposed ban on the export from India of Rhesus monkeys less than 6 lbs. in weight. This was the subject of telegraphic correspondence ending with our telegrams No. 322 of the 28th February and No. 327 of the 1st March. The position here is unchanged. We have been in touch with the Americans and the Germans, who are both making official representations about the ban. The Canadians have told us that they have decided, as a result of the ban, the last of a long series of restrictions on this trade, not to purchase any further monkeys from India.
2. We, on our part, are anxious to go back to the Health Ministry as soon as possible. We would therefore welcome any ammunition you can supply immediately, to enable us to return to the charge, even if - for example - you cannot yet quote a firm statement from the R.S.P.C.A. that the previous conditions of transport for monkeys were of a satisfactory standard.'
-
SentH. O'Brien to M.R. Simmons, 17th December, 1958 (DO 35/8640).
17 Dec 1958
Description:'Dear Miss Simmons,
Thank you for your letter of the 3rd December about Mr. N. Edward's application for an exporter's licence [sic?] for monkeys. We have been in touch with Brigadier Dillon, who is handling the arrangements at this en, and he says that there is no possible snag about the issue of a licence [sic] because he holds the Government of India's written undertaking that such a license will be issued as soon as proper veterinary approval is given to the new company's premises at Lucknow.
2. Brigadier Dillon says that what is holding things up is the difficulty of making arrangements for the air transport of these monkeys from Lucknow. Negotiations with Air India International have broken down and it does not look as if Indian Air Lines will be willing to air lift the animals from Lucknow to the U.K. as had been hoped. As soon as the transport arrangements are cleared the project will go ahead but if it is not possible to make satisfactory air transport arrangements I am afraid the scheme may have to be abandoned or its location altered.'
-
Recipient ofA.H. Reed to H. O'Brien, 20th October, 1959 (DO 35/8640).
20 Oct 1959
Description:'[Dear O'Brien,]
When I wrote to you on the 7th October about Dr. Lane-Petter's proposed visit to India I had not, as I explained at our meeting, appreciated that you were still in the country. Since I am not clear if you will be in Delhi by the time this letter gets there I should record, for the benefit of any third party who may wish to take action on it, that you explained to me that there was a considerable hostility on the part of Indian officials to the whole export trade in monkeys. You said that any change in the arrangements for their transport could only be achieved if they were changes for the better so far as the monkeys were concerned. You asked that copies of the B.S.I. recommendations should be sent out well in advance of Dr. Lane-Petter's visit so that preliminary examination might be given to them by the Indian authorities.
...
We have had a very quick look at the B.S.I. recommendations and they seem to differ from the Government of India's own rules, to the extent of being less strict, in the following places:-
(a) Page 5. The shipment of pregnant monkeys is permitted when specifically requested by the importer, whereas the Indian rules prohibit this absolutely.
(b) Page 6. This recommends that not more than twelve monkeys should travel in the standard cage, while the Indian rules limit the numbers to eight for small monkeys (4-6 lbs.) or six for large monkeys (over 6 lbs.).
(c) Page 7. The recommendation is for three ounces of food per monkey per day, while the Indian rules recommend 1/2 lb.
(d) Page 7. The recommendation is that sick animals, as opposed to injured ones, should not be removed from their travelling cages, while the Indian rules recommend their removal to separate cages.
You may wish, before passing copies of these new rules to the Government of India, to consider whether there are any parts of them which would provoke immediate and unfavourable reactions, or whether there is any further clarification that Dr. Lane-Petter might be asked to provide.'
-
Recipient ofM.R. Simmons to H. O'Brien, 14th January, 1959 (DO 35/8640).
14 Jan 1949
Description:'Dear Mr. O'Brien,
...
3. We should be grateful if you could take informal soundings of the Indian authorities to find out their attitude and what line they are taking in their reply to the R.S.P.C.A., unless, of course, you feel that even an informal approach might, in the circumstances, encourage the Indians to attach undue weight to the R.S.P.C.A.'s representations.'
-
Recipient ofW. Lane-Petter to H. O'Brien, 24th June, 1958 (DO 35/8640).
24 Jun 1958
Description:'Dear Mr Brien [sic],
...
I have known Mr. Edwards for some years as an animal supplier, and more particularly recently in connection with his present enterprise. I believe that he has the intention and ability to conduct any business he may arrange properly and in a way of which we would approve, and I would be most grateful if you would give him any help you are able to in enabling him to obtain a license for exporting monkeys from India.
We have in this encounter been severely handicapped by the unsatisfactory state of the monkey supply and feel it is high time that somebody else came into the field. My belief is that Mr. Edwards should be able to do some good work here. I may add that I am asking the Medical Research Council at Head Office to request the Indian Government through the Commonwealth Relations Office to give favourable consideration for Mr. Edward's application for a license.'
-
Links
Menu
