[History and movements of alternatives to animal experiments in Japan]

Experimental animals have been used so very often on science studies from the late 19th centuries. Especially since Wistar rat was produced in the 1890s as an experimental animal, various kinds of experimental animals have been developed and made enormous contribution to human beings. It is not an exaggeration to say that experimental animals have made us alive and rich, so to speak. However, the number of uses of experimental animals has decreased since its peak in 1990s. One of the reasons is the existence of Alternatives to animal experiments. Around 1980, Importance of 3Rs has been increased among its support, and the trend of animal experiments has moved to ones without using animals all over the world. It is because animal experiments cost and take time, but the biggest reason is the concern towards overuse of experimental animals. There is a rooting ethical doubt among many researchers that we can sacrifice other animals to save human lives. Human beings have hunted, and domesticated other animals as means of surviving. But today, we are trying to find a way to live not only for ourselves but for other animals on the whole earth. As a mean of the living, Alternatives to animal experiments have significant meanings and it will get even more important in the future. In this article, I would like to briefly explain the history and movements on Alternatives to animal experiments that took place here in Japan.

Assignment of culpability to animals as a form of abuse: Historical and cultural perspectives

How the law regards animals reflects cultural trends that have varied widely from antiquity to the present. This article argues that cultural views of animals have shaped laws, attitudes, and practices worldwide. Whereas ancient (biblical and Mesopotamian) practices turned on economics, medieval concepts of animal culpability aligned with Christian beliefs of the primacy of humans. In medieval Europe, pets, farm animals, vermin, and insects could be held accountable for damage to persons and property. Considered entitled to due process, they were represented, tried, and punished - sometimes in public executions. Centuries of regarding animals as property subordinated to humans gave way to animal cruelty laws. It was not until the 19th century that respect for animal welfare, apart from economics, assumed legal significance. Presently, animals are not considered capable of criminal intent but can be "executed" for dangerousness. However, they may possess legal standing as civil complainants in animal rights cases. Contemporary trends include animal rights activism and courts conferring legal personhood to animals. The discussion concludes that there will be disparate approaches worldwide, based on prevailing views of animal sentience, spiritually based concepts and values, litigation arguing property and environmental law, and economics.

David Ferrier's Experimental Localization of Cerebral Functions and the Anti-Vivisection Debate

While representing one of the most important developments in the knowledge of the brain, both for its theoretical advances and its medical consequences, the work of David Ferrier met with strong criticism from conservative circles in Victorian society. At the end of 19th century certain British neurologists and neurosurgeons – including Ferrier – faced vehement public attacks by those aristocrats who, under the banner of antivivisectionism and “natural theology”, expressed their fears of the reorganization of medicine into a scientific discipline. The debate that developed in Victorian society after these events led not only to the diffusion of Ferrier’s ideas and public recognition of the advanced neurosurgical practices that stemmed from his work, but also contributed to the affirmation of the medical community in the scientific world of the time.

Medical science and the Cruelty to Animals Act 1876: A re-examination of anti-vivisectionism in provincial Britain

The Cruelty to Animals Act 1876 was an important but ambiguous piece of legislation. For researchers it stymied British science, yet ensured that vivisection could continue under certain restrictions. For anti-vivisection protestors it was positive proof of the influence of their campaigns, yet overly deferent to Britain's scientific elite. In previous accounts of the Act and the rise of anti-vivisectionism, scientific medicine central to these debates has been treated as monolithic rather than a heterogeneous mix of approaches; and this has gone hand-in-hand with the marginalizing of provincial practices, as scholarship has focused largely on the 'Golden Triangle' of London, Oxford and Cambridge. We look instead at provincial research: brain studies from Wakefield and anthrax investigations in Bradford. The former case elucidates a key role for specific medical science in informing the anti-vivisection movement, whilst the latter demonstrates how the Act affected the particular practices of provincial medical scientists. It will be seen, therefore, how provincial medical practices were both influential upon, and profoundly affected by, the growth of anti-vivisectionism and the passing of the Act. This paper emphasises how regional and varied medico-scientific practices were central to the story of the creation and impact of the Cruelty to Animals Act.

Animals Used in Research and Education, 1966-2016: Evolving Attitudes, Policies, and Relationships

Since the inception of the Association of American Veterinary Medical Colleges (AAVMC), the use of animals in research and education has been a central element of the programs of member institutions. As veterinary education and research programs have evolved over the past 50 years, so too have societal views and regulatory policies. AAVMC member institutions have continually responded to these events by exchanging best practices in training their students in the framework of comparative medicine and the needs of society. Animals provide students and faculty with the tools to learn the fundamental knowledge and skills of veterinary medicine and scientific discovery. The study of animal models has contributed extensively to medicine, veterinary medicine, and basic sciences as these disciplines seek to understand life processes. Changing societal views over the past 50 years have provided active examination and continued refinement of the use of animals in veterinary medical education and research. The future use of animals to educate and train veterinarians will likely continue to evolve as technological advances are applied to experimental design and educational systems. Natural animal models of both human and animal health will undoubtedly continue to serve a significant role in the education of veterinarians and in the development of new treatments of animal and human disease. As it looks to the future, the AAVMC as an organization will need to continue to support and promote best practices in the humane care and appropriate use of animals in both education and research.

Moving beyond the welfare standard of psychological well-being for nonhuman primates: the case of chimpanzees

Since 1985, the US Animal Welfare Act and Public Health Service policy have required that researchers using nonhuman primates in biomedical and behavioral research develop a plan "for a physical environment adequate to promote the psychological well-being of primates." In pursuing this charge, housing attributes such as social companionship, opportunities to express species-typical behavior, suitable space for expanded locomotor activity, and nonstressful relationships with laboratory personnel are dimensions that have dominated the discussion. Regulators were careful not to direct a specific set of prescriptions (i.e., engineering standards) for the attainment of these goals, but to leave the design of the programs substantially up to "professional judgment" at the local level. Recently, however, the Institute of Medicine, in its path-finding 2011 report on the necessity of chimpanzee use in research, bypassed this flexible and contingent concept, and instead, required as a central precondition that chimpanzees be housed in "ethologically appropriate" environments. In so doing, obligations of ethical treatment of one great ape species were elevated above the needs of some research. The evolution and significance of this change are discussed.

The Animal Welfare Act: from enactment to enforcement

Originally enacted in 1966, the Laboratory Animal Welfare Act has been amended several times and renamed the Animal Welfare Act. Responsibility for administering the Animal Welfare Act was delegated within the United States Department of Agriculture to the Administrator of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, and regulations and standards have been developed to implement the intent of Congress conveyed in the language of the Act. In our opinion, the key to compliance with the Animal Welfare Act and its regulations and standards is to have in place a proactive, progressive Animal Care and Use Program that uses the semiannual inspection and programmatic review process to improve the day-to-day management of the program. Successfully managing the inspection process has taken on new meaning in what has recently become known as the 'Age of Enforcement.' As part of this approach, the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service made changes to the inspection process and issued an Enhanced Animal Welfare Enforcement Plan, which included the development of an Inspection Requirements Handbook. The Inspection Requirements Handbook provides inspectors with information on conducting inspections and includes as an attachment a flow chart for Enforcement Action Guidance. The chart describes 4 types of actions that may occur as part of the enforcement process and the steps that will be followed if noncompliant items are documented during an inspection.

From cruelty to welfare: the emergence of farm animal welfare in Britain, 1964-71

There is a long history of concern in Britain for how animals are treated. Until the 1960s, these concerns were expressed largely in terms of cruelty or suffering, which was prevented through various acts of Parliament. Over the period 1964-71, amidst public debates about intensive farming, a new discourse of animal welfare emerged. To understand what welfare meant and how it became established as a term, a concept and a target of government regulation, it is necessary to examine farming politics and practices, the existing tradition of animal protection and attempts to rethink the nature of animal suffering.

Model organisms and model environments: a rodent laboratory in science, medicine and society

In recent years there has been increasing interest in the role of animals in science and medicine. While historians have tended to focus on the processes of standardisation, increasing attention is being given to the surprising and unexpected elements of the model organism. Experimental organisms are, simultaneously, both artefacts and samples of nature. Rachel Ankeny and Sabina Leonelli put it clearly and succinctly: ‘they are systems that have been engineered and modified to enable the controlled investigation of specific phenomena, yet at the same time they remain largely mysterious products of millennia of evolution, whose behaviours, structures, and physiology are for the most part still relatively ill-understood by scientists.’ In continuously generating new questions, organisms provide novelty so essential to successful experimental systems. They are, as Hans-Jörg Rheinberger would argue, scientific objects or ‘epistemic things’, not merely predictable ‘technical objects’.

Hippophagy in the UK: a failed dietary revolution

This study explores the history of horseflesh consumption in modern Britain and France. It examines why horsemeat became relatively popular in France, but not Britain. These reasons include the active role of scientists, philanthropists, journalists and butchers. These figures did not actively promote horsemeat in Britain. These factors are as important as cultural and economic ones in explaining dietary transformation.

A history of animal welfare science

Human attitudes to animals have changed as non-humans have become more widely incorporated in the category of moral agents who deserve some respect. Parallels between the functioning of humans and non-humans have been made for thousands of years but the idea that the animals that we keep can suffer has spread recently. An improved understanding of motivation, cognition and the complexity of social behaviour in animals has led in the last 30 years to the rapid development of animal welfare science. Early attempts to define welfare referred to individuals being in harmony with nature but the first usable definition incorporated feelings and health as part of attempts to cope with the environment. Others considered that welfare is only about feelings but it is argued that as feelings are mechanisms that have evolved they are a part of welfare rather than all of it. Most reviews of welfare now start with listing the needs of the animal, including needs to show certain behaviours. This approach has used sophisticated studies of what is important to animals and has replaced the earlier general guidelines described as freedoms. Many measures of welfare are now used and indicate how good or how poor the welfare is. Naturalness is not a part of the definition of welfare but explains why some needs exist. In recent years, welfare has become established as one of various criteria used to decide on whether a system is sustainable because members of the public will not accept systems that cause poor welfare. The study of welfare has become part of the scientific basis upon which important political decisions are made.

Crossing, grading, and keeping pure: animal breeding and exchange around 1860

During the first half of the nineteenth century, breeders of livestock in the United States and Germany began to approach animal husbandry in a more systematic manner. Responding to changes in ideas about heredity and economic pressures, they imported large numbers of animals from abroad, especially from Great Britain. With these imported breeds they set out to transform their native specimens to better meet the needs of an industrializing nation. Their strategies for animal improvement, which included grading, crossing, and pure breeding, constituted practical experiments into heredity that ran parallel to the work of naturalists. By 1860, the modern system of breeding, with its attention to public registries of pedigrees, gained increasing influence in both contexts.

Wave of mutilation: the cattle mutilation phenomenon of the 1970s

During the 1970s many small-scale cattle ranchers across the Midwest reported finding their cattle mutilated. The episode, often dismissed as mass hysteria or sensationalized reporting, demonstrates the growing dissatisfaction of many ranchers concerning government intrusiveness and restrictive policies. These frustrations found a release in response to the mutilation phenomenon during which ranchers vented their anger by taking direct aim at the federal government. The turbulent economic conditions of the period paired with government interference in the cattle industry helped sustain the mutilation phenomenon as ranchers projected their fears and insecurities through the bizarre episode. The hostility ranchers showed toward the federal government during the mutilation scare presaged and helped provide the impetus for events such as the Sagebrush Rebellion. The mutilation phenomenon also underscores the pronounced effects of the libertarian movement of the 1960s that gave rise to the New Right and gained adherents across the West and Midwest.

Outpatient department concerns

Following an allegation that women did not ‘receive the respect to which their sex entitled them’, the King and the Queen paid a visit to the London Hospital in Whitechapel to see how women were treated. The King, according to a report in the BJN6 August 1910, ‘sat among the students and saw for himself how the women were treated by the doctors’. Following this report, the BJN published a news item relating to a complaint they had received from a nurse who visited the hospital recently.

On Hans, Zou and the others: wonder animals and the question of animal intelligence in early twentieth-century France

During the second half of the nineteenth century, the advent of widespread pet ownership was accompanied by claims of heightened animal abilities. Psychical researchers investigated many of these claims, including animal telepathy and ghostly apparitions. By the beginning of the twentieth century, news of horses and dogs with the ability to read and calculate fascinated the French public and scientists alike. Amidst questions about the justification of animal cruelty in laboratory experiments, wonder animals came to represent some extraordinary possibilities associated with their kind. Psychologists speculated on the feats of wonder animals. They considered the possibility that these animals shared consciousness and intelligence with humans, and that-if confirmed-their alleged amazing abilities could lead to a new understanding of cognition for all animals. This article focuses on the few years during which claims of wonder animals occupied a significant place in French psychology and psychical research. It argues that as explanations involving deception or unconscious cues gained increased acceptance, the interest in wonder animals soon led to a backlash in comparative psychology that had repercussions for all animals, particularly those used in experimentation, in that it contributed to the decline of research addressing cognitive abilities in non-human species.

A brave new animal for a brave new world: The British Laboratory Animals Bureau and the constitution of international standards of laboratory animal production and use, circa 1947-1968

In 1947 the Medical Research Council of Britain established the Laboratory Animals Bureau in order to develop national standards of animal production that would enable commercial producers better to provide for the needs of laboratory animal users. Under the directorship of William Lane-Petter, the bureau expanded well beyond this remit, pioneering a new discipline of "laboratory animal science" and becoming internationally known as a producer of pathogenically and genetically standardized laboratory animals. The work of this organization, later renamed the Laboratory Animals Centre, and of Lane-Petter did much to systematize worldwide standards for laboratory animal production and provision--for example, by prompting the formation of the International Committee on Laboratory Animals. This essay reconstructs how the bureau became an internationally recognized center of expertise and argues that standardization discourses within science are inherently internationalizing. It traces the dynamic co-constitution of standard laboratory animals alongside that of the identities of the users, producers, and regulators of laboratory animals. This process is shown to have brought into being a transnational community with shared conceptual understandings and material practices grounded in the materiality of the laboratory animal, conceived as an instrumental technology.

["In the Third Reich there must be no cruelty to animals anymore"--the development of the Reich's Animal Welfare Law from 1933]

In the German Reich cruelty to animals was punishable over decades only under anthropozentrical points of view, animal experiments and slaughter without stunning were also settled insufficient. Then at the end of the republic of Weimar initiated by the national socialists slaughter without stunning was forbidden. After the takeover by the national socialists the ban was immediately extended to the hole country, the criminal punishment of cruelty to animals was increased and finally the Reichstierschutzgesetz was enacted--influenced by an ethical way of protection of animals. The societies for the prevention of cruelty to animals were aligned and offences against the law were punished with hard sentences. Protection of animals was particularly promoted by the national socialists on propagandistic purposes and served for the compensation of an increasing degeneration of social values.

[Experiments on living subjects: the vivisection debate in German and British medical weekly journals 1919-1939]

By the end of the 1920s, animal experiments were considered a standardized procedure for testing medical substances and therapies. In the context of the so-called "crisis of medicine", however, some physicians and the wider lay public in Germany and Great Britain criticized animal based research. While British antivivisectionists had little relevance in the 1930s, their German counterparts allied with the National Socialist Party and gained social and political force. The debates within the German and British medical profession about doctors' interventions in that debate, as well as the public perception of doctors will be analysed on the basis of the most important medical weekly journals of the time, that were involved in these debates.

Animals in surgery--surgery in animals: nature and culture in animal-human relationship and modern surgery

AThis paper looks at the entangled histories of animal-human relationship and modem surgery. It starts with the various different roles animals have in surgery--patients, experimental models and organ providers--and analyses where these seemingly contradictory positions of animals come from historically. The analyses is based on the assumption that both the heterogeneous relationships of humans to animals and modern surgery are the results of fundamentally local, contingent and situated developments and not reducible to large-scale social explanations, such as modernization. This change of perspective opens up a new ways of understanding both phenomena as deeply interwoven with the redrawing of the nature-culture divide.

The animal as surgical patient: a historical perspective in the 20th century

Current veterinary history has not engaged significantly with patient histories. In many historical accounts of veterinary medicine, animal patients are backgrounded or completely invisible. Yet modern veterinary medicine, in its dominant form of companion animal practice, has become increasingly patient-centred. The modern animal patient is accorded something near full subject status in many veterinary clinical interactions. Embracing this raises issues of how to handle animals in veterinary history. Animals are the recipients of veterinary medicine, they exert agency in the clinic and field, yet they have remained problematical for the historian and sociologist, who have remained anthropocentric in orientation. This paper explores different constructions of the veterinary surgical patient in the 20th century in an attempt to begin examination of veterinary history as an animal-patient history "from below." In doing so, a trajectory of the development of British 20th-century veterinary medicine is presented which suggests the value of minding animals in historical accounts. Further interdisciplinary studies of veterinary procedures and practices are needed in order to foreground animals more and evaluate their subject status within historical and contemporary veterinary medicine.

Sir Michael Foster MD FRS (1836-1907): the rise of the British school of physiology

In 1867 William Sharpey (1802-80), Professor of General Anatomy and Physiology at University College, London, appointed Michael Foster to the unique post of Teacher of Practical Physiology; in Britain the study of experimental physiology was dormant. In 1870 Foster accepted a Praelectorship in Physiology at Trinity College, Cambridge, and soon established a school of physiology. He was the first Cambridge Professor of Physiology (1883-1903). Foster, a great teacher, had a remarkable ability to attract talented students and to inspire them to undertake research. He himself took inspiration from the scientific philosophy of Thomas Henry Huxley (1825-95) and of Claude Bernard (1813-78). Foster was active in the foundation of the Physiological Society (1876), and founded and edited the Journal of Physiology (1878). He was interested in the scientific training of medical students and wrote a highly lauded Text Book of Physiology (1877). Physiology became a profession in its own right and British physiologists were in the vanguard of research.

Physiology, propaganda, and pound animals: medical research and animal welfare in mid-twentieth century America

In 1952, the University of Michigan physiologist Robert Gesell shocked his colleagues at the business meeting of the American Physiological Society by reading a prepared statement in which he claimed that some of the animal experimentation being carried out by scientists was inhumane. He especially attacked the National Society for Medical Research (NSMR), an organization that had been founded to defend animal experimentation. This incident was part of a broader struggle taking place at the time between scientists and animal welfare advocates with respect to what restrictions, if any, should be placed on animal research. A particularly controversial issue was whether or not pound animals should be made available to laboratories for research. Two of the prominent players in this controversy were the NSMR and the Animal Welfare Institute, founded and run by Gesell's daughter, Christine Stevens. This article focuses on the interaction between these two organizations within the broader context of the debate over animal experimentation in the mid-twentieth century.

The "canary incident" in W.C. Field's 1928 Earl Carroll's vanities stage dental skit

W.C. Fields (1880-1946), a gifted writer, director and performer, became one of the greatest comedians, jugglers and pantomimes of all time. This crusty, opinionated curmudgeon, whose multifaceted career spanned most of the 20th century, made his name in burlesque, vaudeville, the legitimate stage, silent pictures, talkies, radio, books and recordings. 1-3 He died before a new media -- television - could have brought him even more success. The following article explores a fascinating incident which occurred in the 1928 New York Vanities production on Broadway. A highly popular dental skit written by Fields and entitled "An Episode at the Dentist's," involved the controversial, on-stage employment of a live canary. Documented here are the findings and out come of a legal hearing in which Fields was accused of "cruelty to a canary."

Science in the 19th-century zoo

The 19th century saw the advent of the modern zoological garden. The newly founded zoos not only claimed to educate and entertain their audiences, but also to serve science by providing direct access to exotic animals. However, reality did not live up to the promise of such rhetoric. The vast majority of biologists preferred to use dead bodies as the material for their morphological research. Nevertheless, there was still a strong interaction between the zoo and science. In the debate on Darwinism, the apes in the cage played a vital role.

USDA Perspective on Environmental Enrichment for Animals

This article provides a brief historical background of the events and circumstances that led to the 1985 Animal Welfare Act (AWA) amendments. It describes the development of the regulations promulgated by the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) in 1991 as a result of these amendments, the reasoning given for the proposals, and the revisions that were made during the process. Information is included on USDA implementation of the regulations regarding exercise for dogs and environmental enhancement for nonhuman primates. Also mentioned briefly are the requirements for socialization of marine mammals and space requirements for certain other regulated warm-blooded species. These requirements apply to animal dealers (breeders and brokers), exhibitors, commercial transporters, and research facilities. The standards for exercise and environmental enhancement were different from any others previously contained in the AWA regulations, and required more research and understanding of species-specific needs by the regulated community. Finally, this article describes some of the initiatives being undertaken by the research community and USDA-Animal and Plant Health Inspection Services (APHIS)-Animal Care to provide the necessary education and guidance indicated by the violation history data.

50 years of the Institute for Laboratory Animal Research (ILAR): 1953-2003

The history of the Institute for Laboratory Animal Research (ILAR) begins, as does all of laboratory animal science, with the ancient philosophers, anatomists, and physiologists whose work presaged the use of animals in biomedical research and the institutions that arose due to this use. Modern laboratory animal science and medicine began in the late 1940s and early 1950s as five Chicago-area institutions hired veterinarians to manage their animal facilities. Each of these men became instrumental in the founding of the organizations that collectively make up the laboratory animal science and medicine organizations. Nathan Brewer, one of the "Chicago five," was particularly influential in the founding of ILAR. His boss at the University of Chicago, Dr. Paul Weiss, a member of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), asked him to help establish a committee with the stated purpose of preparing recommendations to the NAS to develop an office to obtain information on sources of supply for research animals. This office became ILAR, and Brewer was chairman of its first report on the diseases of laboratory animals. He was also a founding diplomat and first president of the American College of Laboratory Animal Medicine. This history recognizes the thoughtful and energetic contributions of scientists and veterinarians to ILAR. It provides a 50-year overview of the programs and reports of ILAR and highlights examples where these reports have been adopted by scientists and federal agencies and incorporated into national laws and policies governing the use of animals in research both in the United States and in other countries.

The Animal Welfare Act, USDA, & research

In the above discussion, the concept and evolution of IACUC oversight of research facility animal care and use programs and common USDA citations concerning these programs was reviewed. The majority of USDA citations are program-related and involve both IACUC and veterinary care functions. Common IACUC-related citations concern inadequacies involving required information in protocols (such as rationales for the species and numbers used and descriptions of the procedures proposed), searches for alternatives to painful or distressful procedures, and minimization of pain and distress. Common veterinary care citations concern inadequacies involving veterinary care facilities, daily observation of the animals, and veterinary care itself (e.g., maintaining inadequate records or using expired medications). IACUC's are advised to ensure that their program records are comprehensive enough to demonstrate that their facility's animal care and use program complies with the AWA and USDA regulations. The overall ongoing success of self-regulation in the research industry is acknowledged, and APHIS's current concentration on the recognition and alleviation of distress, as well as pain, is noted. In the future, APHIS will continue in its oversight role as IACUC programs continue to evolve in their awareness and application of the advances in pain and distress recognition and management. Together, we will continue to work for the benefit of the animals used in research, whose welfare is so important to the quality of that very research.

[Laboratory animals and official Mexican norms (NOM-062-ZOO-1999)]

This article concerns animal experimentation and official Mexican norm Nom 0062-Zoo-1999 entitled Technical specifications for the production, care and use of laboratory animals. The history of animal experimentation is briefly resumed. During the nineteenth century, doubts arose as to the right to expose animals to experimental procedures that frequently cause pain and suffering. The first law which protected animals against cruelty was passed in Great Britain in 1876; subsequently, other nations approved similar legislation. During the second part of the twentieth century, opposition to animal experimentation grew. Other groups, mainly scientists and pharmaceutical concerns, defended the right to use animals in research. New knowledge concerning the neurophysiology, cognitive capacity, and the animal faculty to experience pain is briefly mentioned. Guidelines on care and use of animals used in research published in several countries are listed. Finally, the recently published Mexican legislation (Norm) referring to production, care and use of laboratory animals is discussed and its benefits are stressed.

Stunning bodies: animal slaughter, Judaism, and the meaning of humanity in Imperial Germany

In 1886, the National Association of Animal Protection Societies petitioned the German Reichstag to protest “the deplorable state of affairs surrounding the method of slaughtering, the role of the butcher, and finally the demoralizing effect that the sight of this albeit necessary killing of livestock must have, particularly on the youth.” Calling for a nationwide law to prohibit the killing of livestock without prior stunning, animal protectionists insisted that only nationwide state intervention could alleviate the widespread problems with slaughter, which, by extension, would guarantee the advancement of humanity. Yet, butchers and Jewish communities vehemently disagreed and in more than two thousand counterpetitions, they appealed to the Reichstag to refrain from proposing such a law. Why did a relatively minor issue like the slaughter of livestock spark so much controversy, and, more importantly, why did it become such a politicized agenda when it was deliberated in the Reichstag in 1887 and again in 1899?