d8'i <' 9 
 
 REPORT 
 
 OF THE 
 
 amertcati Humane association 
 
 ON 
 
 VIVISECTION IN AMERICA 
 
 ADOPTED 
 
 AT MINNEAPOLIS, MINN 
 
 September 26, 1895. 
 
 CHICAGO, ILL. 
 THE AMERICAi^ HUMANE ASSOCIATION. 
 
 560 Wabash Avenue. 
 
 1896. 
 
 k 4 fc 7 
 
An abstract of the following Report may be had at 
 twenty cents per dozen copies. 
 
 This Report will be sent free to any Public Library 
 in the United States; but otherwise than this, it is not 
 intended for gratuitous distribution. A limited number 
 of copies may be had at fifteen cents each, postpaid, 
 by addressing 
 
 THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE, - 
 Box 215, 
 
 Providence, R.I. 
 
 DUKE UNIVERSITY 
 MEDICAL CENTER LIBRARY 
 HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS 
 
 it 
 
 :^ 
 
REPORT 
 
 OF THE 
 
 Smericau ©timane Association 
 
 ON 
 
 VIVISECTION IN AMERICA 
 
 ADOPTED 
 
 AT MINNEAPOLIS, MINN. 
 
 September 26, 1895. 
 
 CHICAGO, ILL. 
 
 THE AMERICAN HUMANE ASSOCIATION. 
 
 560 Wabash Avenue. 
 
 1896. 
 
University Press : 
 John AVilsun and Son, Cambridge, U. S. A. 
 
REPORT 
 
 OF 
 
 THE AMERICATS^ HUMANE ASSOCIATION 
 
 ON 
 
 VIVISECTION IN AMERICA. 
 
 MIJS^NEAPOLIS, SEPT. 26, 1895. 
 
 THE Special Committee appointed at the last annual meeting of 
 the Americax Humane Association, for the purpose of 
 obtaining a census of the opinions regarding Vivisection which gen- 
 erally prevail, have now completed their task, and beg leave to submit 
 the following report: — 
 
 The purpose and scope of their investigations seem to have been 
 somewhat misunderstood. The American Humane Association did 
 not wish to obtain a preponderance of signatures, either for or against 
 the practice of vivisection. What seemed desirable was an investi- 
 gation regarding the extent to which different views, particularly 
 regarding painful experimentation, are now entertained by those 
 more influential classes of society whose judgments exert the greater 
 potency in the formation of public opinion. To do this, it became 
 necessary to formulate precise statements of slightly diverging 
 beliefs, in such form as that they should at any rate touch this one 
 question of restriction or non-restriction of experiments in pain. It 
 needs to be remembered that the word "vivisection," when used as 
 a synonym for scientific experiments upon animals, may cover op- 
 erations not more painful th.'m a pin-prick; or, on the other hand, 
 experiences as excruciating as the imagination can conceive. To ask 
 simply whether one approves of vivisection or condemns it, would be 
 meaningless, unless the definitions given were precise. 
 
 Three leading views regarding the practice of vivisection may be 
 easily recognized : — 
 
 1. Its total condemnation because of tendency to cruelty. 
 
 2. Its restriction within certain limits. 
 
 3. Its approval without any other restraint than the will of the 
 experimenter himself. 
 
4 REPORT OF THE AMERICAN HUMANE ASSOCIATION 
 
 The second view, however, is capable of considerable subdivision'. 
 One person may favor vivisection provided it be limited to absolutely 
 painless experiments. Another would not condemn it if the pain 
 were slight, and the possible utility to humanity very great. 
 
 Four statements of opinion were carefully formulated, and to these 
 a fifth was finally added, which was sent, however, as hereafter noted, 
 to but very few others than members of the medical profession. But 
 even these could by no means express all the shades of differing 
 opinion which seem to exist in regard to this subject. Some few 
 persons indeed could find nothing in either statement to endorse or 
 condemn, while others, reading with extreme and careful discrimina- 
 tion, indicated by erasures and changes in phraseology their variance 
 of opinion. But that the statements, as drawn, do fairly represent 
 existing opinions is evinced by the fact, that, without any erasures 
 or changes, each one received the signatures of men of national 
 reputation. 
 
 The choice of persons whose views on this question should be 
 solicited was a matter of no little consideration. It was, of course, 
 impossible to ask all whose judgment would be valuable ; and such 
 selection was necessary as at least should be fairly representative in 
 character and weight. It may be of interest to know the leading 
 rules which governed the final choice of names. 
 
 1. In the first place, the opinions of the Medical Profession were 
 desired. For their benefit, real or supposed, the practice of vivisec- 
 tion is mostly carried on. If, then, all experiments upon living 
 animals are of such great value that no restraint whatever need be 
 observed, it might be safely assumed that medical men after years 
 of practical experience in the treatment of disease would be certain 
 to know it. But the number of men in the medical profession in 
 this country alone is over one hundred thousand, and to ask the 
 judgment of all these would be manifestly impracticable. Then, 
 too, the opinions of young men fresli from the medical school could 
 not compare in value with those of other physicians who for years 
 have been engaged in the combat with disease. It was necessary 
 somewhat to draw lines. The medical profession in the States of 
 New York and Massachusetts may be assumed to be as intelligently 
 acquainted with the whole subject as physicians anywhere in the 
 United States, and it seemed to us exceedingly probable that the 
 views of physicians in other sections of the country would not greatly 
 differ in their proportions from the varying judgments regarding 
 vivisection which should be elicited in these two great common, 
 wealths. Every physician in these two States who had been at least 
 fifteen years in the practice of his profession was invited to give the 
 Association the benefit of his mature experience on the question. A 
 
ON VIVISECTION IN AMERICA. ' • 5 
 
 few prominent medical men in other States received like invitations, 
 but these instances were rare. The physicians upon the Board of 
 Instructors in several leading medical colleges in ISTew York, Boston, 
 Philadelphia, Syracuse, Chicago, and other cities were also asked for 
 expressions of opinion. The jur^^ in this case seems tons to be fairly 
 representative of the medical profession, and the results obtained 
 were so unexpected as to call for special remark. If we may judge 
 from the replies received, the majority of physicians who have tested 
 value by experience are not in favor of "unrestricted vivisection." 
 
 2. For the opinions of those engaged in Educational work, our cir- 
 culars were sent, first, to the president of each college and university 
 in the United States; and, next, to the principal members of the 
 teaching faculty of the leading institutions of learning. 
 
 3. In respect to Clergymen, it was very difficult to determine from 
 whom among them opinions should be asked; and, as in the case of 
 physicians, it was deemed best to solicit views only among those of 
 the various denominations whose years of -service or whose promi- 
 nent position in the Church lent to their words a greater weight. 
 To professors in various theological schools, to clergymen in our 
 larger cities, and especially to men upon whom for years of service 
 or unusual activity in clerical work the degree of Doctor of Divinity 
 has been conferred, our circulars have been principally addressed. 
 Your committee regret the modest reticence which in so many in- 
 stances probably prevented that mention of honorary degrees to 
 which signers were entitled, and of which note, was requested. In 
 some cases, by careful research, these have been supplied; but there 
 are doubtless many to which such titles belong, and from which they 
 are absent in the lists which follow. 
 
 4. From Literary Men, Editors, and Authors, opinions were sought, 
 when addresses could be obtained, wherever achievement and worthy 
 popularity lent weight to the expression of their views. Besides all 
 these classes, there were a few others in other walks of life for 
 whose judgment the world has regard, and whose opinions have been 
 sought. From foreign countries also some expression of sentiment 
 was desired; but these names are reckoned separately in the lists 
 which follow. 
 
 Your committee believe that opinions thus obtained are of special 
 value. We have not attempted a mere "counting of heads." We 
 believe that the views thus collected do represent, in their propor- 
 tions, the various shades of opinion which prevail among the edu- 
 cated classes of the country in regard to the question of unrestricted 
 vivisection. 
 
 It is to be regretted that in some instances the purpose of this 
 inquiry should have been so misunderstood, and that those who 
 
6 REPORT OF THE AMERICAN HUMANE ASSOCIATION 
 
 might have aided us by some expression of opinion preferred rather 
 the expression of criticism or abuse. One of the most prominent 
 biologists of America suggested, with ghastly and peculiar humor, 
 "that the American Humane Association do science the good service 
 of suppressing anti-vivisectionists, — by persuasion, if possible, but 
 hy vivisection, if the seat of disease is too deep for more humane 
 relief." Another eminent scieutific man belonging to Syracuse 
 University went so far as to write an anonymous letter to your com- 
 mittee, suggesting that, before touching the question of vivisection, 
 the American Humane Association should bring law to interfere 
 with such cruelties as "poisoning roaches and bed-bugs, chasing 
 butterflies, breaking down spiders' webs, stealing honey from 
 bees," etc., — actions which he would apparently have regarded as 
 even more reprehensible than the torments inflicted by Magendie, 
 Mantegazza, and their imitators, upon man's nearest companion and 
 friend. Detection of the writer was not at all difficult, but further 
 publicity than this would be too severe a punishment for what 
 perhaps was a thoughtless act. 
 
 Numerous letters were received either accompanying signatures to 
 one of the statements or in explanation of disagreement with their 
 phraseology. Your committee exceedingly regret that limitations of 
 space prevent anything but the briefest quotation from the majority 
 of these communications. Some of these valued letters may perhaps 
 hereafter be printed in other form. For all suggestions and advice 
 the committee tender thanks. Even the few ungracious and critical 
 epistles received are not without their value, if only as indications 
 of proclivities and tendencies of which note must be taken. 
 
 What are the results of our investigation's ? May we assume that 
 in the more educated classes of the United States a majority of 
 persons approve of the dissection of living animals to any extent and 
 for any purpose a physiologist may desire ? 
 
 No. Of the total number of American opinions thus obtained 
 there were : — 
 
 In favor of unlimited vivisection 
 Against unlimited vivisection 
 Evasive or obscure 
 
 Total . . . . . 
 
 Number. 
 
 281 
 
 1,753 
 
 .52 
 
 2,086 
 
 Per Cent. 
 
 13.4 
 
 84.1 
 
 2.5 
 
 100.0 
 
 But vivisection is a practice with which physicians are principally 
 concerned. How do they stand ? Youth and enthusiasm would 
 perhaps demand liberty of action in every way; it is only when 
 
ON VIVISECTION IN AMERICA. 
 
 men have years of practical experience that questions of use or use- 
 lessness really arise. What is the judgment of medical men whose 
 experiences with the problems of disease and pain have taught them 
 where best to look for useful knowledge ? May we infer that as a 
 rule the medical profession demands the privilege of vivisection 
 without limitations or restrictions ? 
 
 No.' So far as given, their vote is as follows:' — 
 
 
 Total No. 
 
 Per Cent. 
 
 • 
 
 243 
 968 
 
 28 
 
 19.6 
 
 78.1 
 
 2.3 
 
 Acjaiust unlimited vivisection . 
 
 
 Total 
 
 1,239 
 
 100.0 ■ 
 
 We regard this result of our inquiries as of unusual value. For 
 many years it has been taken for granted that on one side of this 
 question of free vivisection were the only true guardians of scientific 
 research, the united ranks of physicians and surgeons, urging the 
 value of all experiments the physiologist desires to make; while 
 on the other side were to be found only ignorance and sentimen- 
 tality united in opposing what they did not comprehend and could 
 not value. We see that this is entirely an erroneous conception 
 of facts. It is only the minority of experienced physicians that 
 demand for physiological research unlimited opportunity indepen- 
 dent of utility, and many of these are physiologists rather than 
 general practitioners. The great majority of medical men ask, 
 indeed, that experimentation shall not be wholly abolished; but. they 
 ask also that it shall not be abused. They condemn the cruel freedom 
 which exists on the continent of Europe, and, as a rule, the repetition 
 of painful experiments for the teaching of well-known facts. 
 
 We cannot refrain from quoting here the opinion of one of the 
 most distinguished physicians in this country, — Dr. Theophilus 
 Parvin, LL.D., late president of the American Academy of Medicine, 
 and professor in Jefferson Medical College, — as an illustration of 
 what we believe to be the position of the majority of the medical 
 profession in this country who have reached middle age: — 
 
 "It is wise for physicians interested in vivisection to recognize 
 that there is on the part of prominent women and men in the laity 
 a strong sentiment of antagonism to experiment on animals; and 
 therefore they should avoid all such work not promising certain 
 benefit to man, and anaesthetics ought always to be employed. I 
 sometimes fear that the anaesthesia is frequently nominal rather 
 than real, else why so many and ingenious contrivances for con- 
 fining the animal during operations, — contrivances that are not 
 
REPOET OF THE AMERICAN HUMANE ASSOCIATION 
 
 made use of in surgical operations upon human beings, their immo- 
 bility being secured by profound anaesthesia. 
 
 "Shoijld the law restrict the performance of vivisection? I think 
 it ought, chiefly as an expression of public sentiment, and for moral 
 effect. . . . That restriction ought to forbid all experiments made 
 without worthy objects, and in every case, so far as possible, the 
 animal during and subsequent to the operation must be preserved 
 from pain. . . , 
 
 " Vivisection is in more danger from ignorant, rash, and reckless 
 experimenters than f^om those directly hostile to it. I cannot think 
 that vivisections done for teaching purposes, simply showing what 
 has been proved time and again upon hundreds and thousands of 
 victims, are justifiable unless anaesthesia is employed, to not merely 
 mitigate, hut to completely abolish sujfering of the animals. Other- 
 wise the influence of such experiments is injurious both to the operator 
 and to the tvittiesses of the operatio7i." 
 
 Let us analyze yet more closely the medical opinions received 
 from Massachusetts and New York. The replies received from 
 physicians in these States may be tabulated as follows: — 
 
 For vivisectiou without restriction . . 
 For vivisection when restricted by utility 
 For vivisection when without pain . . 
 For the total prohibition of vivisection . 
 Obscure or evasive 
 
 Total ......... 
 
 Total No. Per Cent 
 
 220 
 513 
 186 
 207 
 24 
 
 1,150 
 
 19.1 
 44.6 
 16.2 
 18. 
 2.1 
 
 100.0 
 
 We see no reason to doubt that, with slight variations only, these 
 proportions represe'nt the sentiments prevailing in the medical pro- 
 fession throughout the country. If we ask the judgment of other 
 influential classes in the community, we find the same tendency, 
 even more pronounced. In the following tables we have indicated a 
 number of opinions from clergymen, educators, presidents of univer- 
 sities and colleges, and those engaged in college work, etc : — 
 
 
 Clergy, 
 men. 
 
 Educa- 
 tors. 
 
 Authors, 
 
 Editors, 
 
 etc. 
 
 Per Cent. 
 
 For vivisection without restriction . . . 
 For vivisection when restricted by utility . 
 For vivisection when without pain . . . 
 For the total prohibition of vivisection . . 
 Obscure or evasive 
 
 
 189 
 116 
 144 
 
 6 
 
 34 
 
 84 
 49 
 52 
 16 
 
 4 
 63 
 26 
 30 
 
 2 
 
 4.7 
 41.2 
 23.5 
 27.7 
 
 2 9 
 
 100 
 
 Total 
 
 455 
 
 235 
 
 125 
 
ON VIVISECTION IN AMERICA. 9 
 
 To your committee, therefore, it seems certain that the majority of 
 those who represent enliglitened public opinion in this country are 
 not favorable to unlimited vivisection. They do not indeed demand 
 abolition of all experimental research whatever; nor are they agreed 
 as to the scope of restrictions, the value of legal regulation, the defi- 
 nition of "utility," or the methods by which even desirable restraints 
 may be practically enforced. There is also somewhat of scepticism 
 as to the extent to which vivisection has been at all abused, and 
 many who would quickly condemn the evil are far from being con- 
 vinced that such evil exists. But one fact stands clearly out, that a 
 majority of the class to whom we have appealed agree that loherever 
 vivisection approaches cruelty and icselessness, it should be pj^'ohibited 
 and condemned by law. 
 
 It is true, however, that this investigation has made evident the 
 existence of a minority contrary sentiment, of which due note must 
 be taken.. There are physicians and surgeons whose self -sacrificing 
 devotion to humanity is beyond the possibility of doubt, who have 
 signed for unlimited vivisection without criticism or restraint. 
 There are presidents of universities whose zeal for science has led 
 them to declare that with vivisection "morality has nothing to do." 
 There are clergymen of high repute who would condemn all cruelty 
 in the abstract, but whose faith "in the substance of things un- 
 seen" would make of the physiological laboratory a temple for 
 Humanity where all sacrifice is painless and its object the universal 
 good. 
 
 There are large numbers of persons who suggest that all criticism 
 of scientific methods is premature, or out of place in the presence of 
 such other forms of wide-spread cruelty as accompany butchery and 
 so-called sport. There are others who deprecate the infliction of 
 pain or disuse of anaesthetics, unless it happens to be "necessary for 
 the success of the experiment," — a qualification which at once nullifies 
 the very restriction implied. In many colleges and institutions of 
 learning we note a prevalent disposition to trust a vivisector entirely, 
 "unless there seems reason for distrust," — a contingency which is 
 not likely to happen, where trust is absolute and faith serene. But 
 above everything else exists doubt or ignorance of Avhat vivisection 
 really is. A method of scientific research is shrouded in mystery, 
 and is almost unknown and unknowable save to a few. 
 
 "What action may be suggested to the American Humane Associa- 
 tion as a result of your committee's inquiry? 
 
 The following conclusions seem to them not only to be justified 
 by evidence, but in accord with the interests of both science and 
 humanity : — 
 
10 REPORT OF THE AMERICAN HUMANE ASSOCIATION. 
 
 I. Vivisection is not merely a metliod of scientific teaching or 
 investigation, but a practice which is justly subject to ethical 
 restraints. 
 
 II. We believe this practice has been abused. We are compelled 
 to admit that President Parvin was right in declaring before the 
 American Academy of Medicine that there are some American vivi- 
 sectors "who seem, seeking useless knowledge, to be blind to writh- 
 ing agony and deaf to the cry of pain, and to have been guilty of 
 the most damnable cruelties." 
 
 III. We believe in the potency of legislation to lessen these 
 abuses. Again we agree with President Parvin that "law should 
 restrict the performance of vivisection; " that "vivisections done for 
 teaching purposes, simply showing what has been proved time and 
 again upon hundreds and thousands of victims, are not justifiable un- 
 less anaesthesia is employed, to not merely mitigate, but to completely 
 abolish the suffering of the animals." We are glad to find ourselvgs 
 in perfect accord with a scientific authority who declares that "the 
 influence of such experiments without anaesthesia is injurious both 
 to the operator and to the witnesses of the operation.'' 
 
 IV. But far transcending in importance the enactments of any 
 restrictive legislation is the wide dissemination of absolute, accurate 
 knowledge of vivisection as it is to-day carried on in the seclusion of 
 American laboratories. It is alleged that the infliction of pain is of 
 rare occurrence; that abuses are unknown, and that nothing whatever 
 is done which in any way needs to be concealed from the public eye. 
 But these statements are controverted. How then shall truth be 
 reached and be made evident ? It seems to us that knowledge, if 
 attainable, must rest here, as Science declares it must rest elsewhere, 
 not on the statements of interested parties, but on that firm basis 
 she herself demands, — the accurate observation of facts by impartial 
 witnesses. Yet, how is such evidence possible so long as the doors 
 of laboratories are locked and barred to the public, and even to 
 physicians and surgeons who are not personally known ? In the 
 interests of scientific truth we suggest therefore that an experiment 
 be made. We recommend that the American Humane Association 
 during the coming year ask of each physiological laboratory in this 
 country, whether it will accord permission to the President of the 
 local Humane Society or to his authorized representative to be 
 present during any experiments upon animals that may take place, 
 simply as a silent observer, and entirely without privilege of sug- 
 gestion, criticism, or unsolicited remark. If there be no occasion 
 
ON VIVISECTION IN AMEEICA. 11 
 
 for. mystery or seclusion, we believe this privilege will be accorded, 
 if only in the interests of truth and for the dissipation of error. 
 If refused, there can be but one inference and but one remaining 
 appeal. 
 
 Respectfully submitted. 
 
 (Signed) Titus Munson Coan, M. D. 
 Albert Leffingwell, M. D. 
 Matthew Woods, M. D. 
 
 In accordance with the above recommendation the American 
 Humane Association adopted the following resolution : — 
 
 '' Resolved, That the American Humane Association, having con- 
 sidered the report of its Special Committee on Vivisection, believes 
 that it should ask for yet more light regarding the aims and methods 
 of experimentation upon living animals. Laying aside for the present 
 all other evidence, the Association seeks now for positive knowledge ' 
 by that method which Science idealizes and demands, — based, not 
 upon authority, but upon the accumulated experience of a large num- 
 ber of independent observers in all parts of the country. 
 
 " The Association therefore instructs its President and Secretary, 
 as soon as may be, to ask the authorities having in charge every 
 known physiological laboratory in the United States, whether or not 
 they will accord permission to the President of the local Society, 
 having for its object the prevention of cruelty, or to his authorized 
 representative for the time being, the right of admission to the lab- 
 oratory during any experiments of any kind upon living animals, 
 simply as a student and observer, and entirely without the right of 
 suggestion, criticism, or unsolicited remarks of any kind."' 
 
12 ABSOLUTE PKOHIBITION OF VIVISECTION. 
 
 I. ABSOLUTE PROHIBITION OF VIVISECTION. 
 
 All experimentation upon living animals we consider unnecessarj^, 
 unjustifiable, and morally wrong. Some of the highest medical 
 authorities have asserted that Vivisection does not benefit mankind; 
 that owing largely to differences between the structure of men and 
 animals, the results of operations and the test of drugs upon the 
 latter are wholly misleading, and that the practice has accomplished 
 nothing of real value in the treatment of disease. The greatest 
 physiologist of our century, Sir Charles Bell, declared that such 
 ''experiments have never been the means of discovery;" and that 
 "the opening of living animals has done more to perpetuate error 
 than to enforce the just views taken from anatomy and natural 
 science." Mr. Lawson Tait, one of the most eminent of living sur- 
 geons, claims that but for the fallacies of Vivisection, the art of heal- 
 ing would be to-day "at least a century in advance of its present 
 position;" and Dr. Bell Taylor, one of the leading oculist-surgeons 
 of Great Britain, affirms that " no good ever came from the practice, 
 and no good ever will." With these scientific authorities Ave are in 
 perfect accord. 
 
 But whether any useful knowledge can be thus acquired or not is 
 beside the question. Even if utility could be proved, man has no 
 moral right to attempt to benefit himself at the cost of injury, pain, 
 or disease to the lower animals. The injury which the 'practice of 
 Vivisection causes to the moral sense of the individual and to human- 
 ity far outweighs any possible benefit that could be derived froin it. 
 Dr. Henry J. Bigelow, Professor in the Medical School of Harvard 
 University, declared that " Vivisection deadens the humanity of the 
 students." Nothing which thus lowers morality can be a necessity 
 to progress. 
 
 We hold the infliction of torture to be a moral offence ; and believe 
 experience has demonstrated that Vivisection cannot be sanctioned in 
 any form without opening a door to that offence. We assert that no 
 legal protection from the utmost extremity of torment can ever be 
 given to an animal when once it is laid on the Vivisection table in the 
 laboratory; and that no line can be drawn between experiments that 
 are painless and those involving the utmost torture. The claim that 
 Vivisection has been rendered generally painless by the use of anaes- 
 thetics is wholly misleading ; for physiologists themselves admit that 
 there are no less than thirteen classes of experiments which cannot 
 be satisfactorily performed on anaesthetised animals. 
 
 To allow one kind of Vivisection because " painless " and to con- 
 de-nn another because '- painful " is thus utterly impracticable. No 
 
ABSOLUTE PKOHIBITION OF VIVISECTION. 13 
 
 distinctions could be drawn that the enthusiastic experinienter would 
 regard, and no legal restrictions are possible that would be conscien- 
 tiously observed. Painless or painful, useless or useful, however 
 severe or however slight, Vivisection is therefore a practice so linked 
 with cruelty, and so pernicious in tendency, that any reform is 
 impossible, and it should be absolutely prohibited by law for any 
 purpose. 
 
 Prof." James E. Garretson, M. D., Senior Professor of Surgery, 
 Medico-Chirurgical College, Philadelphia : — 
 
 "I am without words to express my horror of vivisection, though 1 have 
 been a teacher of anatomy and surgery for thirty years. It serves no pur- 
 pose that is not better served after other manners." 
 
 Forbes Winslow, D. C. L. Oxon., M. E. C. P., London, Editor 
 Journal Psychological Medicine ; Physician to the British Hospital 
 for Mental Diseases, Physician to North London Hospital for Con- 
 sumption, etc. : — 
 
 " In my opinion, vivisection has opened up no new views for the treat- 
 ment and cure of diseases. It is most unjustifiable and cruel, and in no way 
 advances medical science. I do not believe in many of the so-called experi- 
 ments* made by these ' faddists,' especially those relating to brain operations 
 on monkeys and the consequent theory of cerebral localization. I have 
 probably more experience than many of these experimenters who have given 
 their opinions to the world as based on what they have done ; and I beg leave 
 to express my utter disbelief in the usefulness of such experiments, and to 
 discredit their being followed by any good results to mankind or to science 
 in general." 
 
 Et. Hon. A. J. Mundella, F. E. S., London. 
 
 Alfred Eussell Wallace, F. E. S., D. C. L. Oxon., LL.D., Author 
 and Naturalist : — 
 
 " I would have signed II. or III. but that I consider effectual official regu- 
 lation impossible, and the increase of official inspectors altogether impolitic." 
 (After the first word he inserts " painful or injurious.") 
 
 Edward Berdoe L. E. C. P. E., M. E., C. E., Physician and Sur- 
 geon, London. 
 
 Hon. Justin McCarthy, M. P., Author, London. 
 
 Prof. William J. Morton, M. D., Professor of Nervous and Men- 
 tal Diseases at the New York Post-Graduate Medical School and 
 Hospital, New York City : — 
 
 " I only wish I could state the above sentiments stronger. If mankind 
 suffers from disease it is its own fault, to be cured by rectification of the 
 causes which lead to it; and it is subversive of the high and moral order of 
 the progress of humanity to inflict pain or death upon other living animals to 
 abolish or minimize disease or suffering due to mankind's own faults. In 
 
14 ABSOLUTE PKOHIBITION OF VIVISECTION. 
 
 the end, the retribution to the race which does this will equal and offset the 
 advantages temporarily gained. One crime or fault does not excuse or 
 justif)' another." 
 
 (To Dr. Morton's father, Dr. W. T. G. Morton, the world owes one of 
 the greatest blessings of this or any other age, — the comparative conquest 
 of pain by the inhalation of ether.) 
 
 B. F. Sherman, M. D., Ex-President of the '^ew York State Med- 
 ical Society, Ogdensburg, N. Y. : — 
 
 " If it could be restricted to utility and without pain, it would be all right ; 
 but if permitted at all, it will be abused." 
 
 Edwin A. W. Harlow, A. M., M. D. (Harvard), Wollaston, Mass. : 
 
 " The late Dr. Henry J. Bigelow, in a lecture, which I heard, before the 
 
 Harvard College Medical School, condemned the practice of some of the 
 
 students in Paris in their vivisections on horses, without anaesthetics, as ' in- 
 
 fernul inltumnnity.' Vivisections in all Medical Schools should be abolished." 
 
 E. H. Hawks, M. D., Lynn, Mass. : — 
 
 "I believe that vivisection blunts the moral sense to such a degree as to 
 become a strong force in the production of criminals." 
 
 J. D. Buck, M. D., Professor of Nervous Diseases and the Princi- 
 ples of Tlierapeutics, and Dean of Pulte Medical College, Cincinnati, 
 Ohio. 
 
 Elmore Palmer, M. D., President (1890) of the Western New 
 York Medical Society, Buffalo, N. Y. 
 
 William Ingalls, M. D., Boston, Mass.: — 
 
 ^'' Absolute proldhilion ; for unless a law can be made which no one can 
 get away from, vivisection will obtain just as it does now." 
 
 Allan Mott-Ring, M. D., Arlington Heights, Mass.: — 
 " Vivisection is an unmanly crime." 
 
 Ira Clark Guptill, M. D., M. S., JSTorthborough, Mass. : — 
 
 " No legal restrictions would be conscientiously observed, and therefore 
 I strike for absolute prohibition b}' law." 
 
 Alex. S; McClean, M. D., Springfield, Mass. : — 
 
 " Have been in practice forty-eight years, and have never been influenced 
 or governed by anything I have seen or read in the line of vivisection." 
 
 Lorenzo W. Cole, M. D., Springfield, Mass. : — 
 
 " I consider it barbarous to torture anything capable of feeling pain, to 
 demonstrate facts which have been proven thousands of times." 
 
 Rt. Rev. John Scarborough, D. D., Bishop of New Jersey. 
 Rt. Rev. John Williams, D. D., LL. D., Bishop of Connecticut. 
 
ABSOLUTE PROHIBITION OF VIVISECTION. 15 
 
 Kt. Rev. Hugh Miller Thompson, D. D., Bishop of Mississippi. 
 
 Rt. Rev. J. H. D. Wingfield, D. D., Bishop of N. California. 
 
 The Very Rev. E. A. Hoffman, D. D., D. C. L., Dean of the Gen- 
 eral Theological Seminary, New York. 
 
 Rev. Dr. Lyman Whitney Allen, Newark, jST. J. : — 
 
 " If vivisection could be absolutely without pain, I should be willing to 
 advocate it under certain restrictions. But who shall be the judge ? As it 
 is at present conducted, it is immoral and wicked. The only safe and Chris- 
 tian standpoint is absolute prohibition. Science has its limits, as have other 
 branches of investigation. Valuable and important as is biological study, 
 life and animal individuality and consciousness have their God-given rights." 
 
 Rev. Dr. G. H. De Bevoise, Keene, N. H. : — 
 
 "Although never having occasion to protest against an act of this kind 
 because of knowledge of its occurrence, I am most decidedly in favor of the 
 absolute prohibition of vivisection, if this may be accomplished. The end in 
 view by no means justifies the means, and very often the enthusiasm of 
 scientific investigation overrides all humane considerations, and is willing 
 that there may be any amount of suffering if only ambition may accomplish 
 its end. Vivisection is more than cruel. It is wicked cruelty, concentrated." 
 
 Rev. Dr. Amory H. Bradford, Associate Editor of '' The Out- 
 look," New York : — 
 
 " I incline to a middle ground between I. and II., but prefer to sign 
 the first." 
 
 President Henry Morton, Ph. D., Stevens Institute of Tech- 
 nology, Hoboken, N. J. 
 
 President David C. John, D. D., Clark University, Ga. 
 President G. W. Holland, Ph. D., Newbury, S. C. 
 President Lawr. Larsbn, Norwegian Luther College, Iowa. 
 
 (Omits first paragraph, the reference to Dr. Bigelow, and the last sentence 
 of the third paragraph.) 
 
 President McK. H. Chamberlin, LL. B., McKendree College, 
 Illinois. 
 
 Samuel S. Garst, M. D., Ph. D., Ashland University, Ohio. 
 President L. L. Hobbs, A.M., Guilford College, N. C. 
 President Jesse Johnson, A. M., Muskingum College, Ohio : — 
 "No set of men may limit the application of the moral law." 
 
 President John Van Ness Standish, LL. D., Lombard Univer- 
 sity, 111. 
 
 President John Braden, Central Tenn. College, Nashville, Tenn. 
 
 President "William F. Shedd, D. D., Acting President of Little 
 Rock University, Little Rock, Ark. 
 
 President H. J; Kiekhoefer, A.M., Northwestern College, 111. 
 
16 • ABSOLUTE PROHIBITION OF VIVISECTION. 
 
 President E, Benjamin Bierman, Ph. D., Lebanon Valley College, 
 Penn. 
 
 President C. W. Carter, D. D., Centenary College, La. 
 President W. F. Melton, Ph.D., Florida Conference College, Fla, : 
 " Vivisection without restrictions is devilish." 
 
 President W. P. Johnston, D. D., Geneva College, Penn. 
 President Tamerlane P. Marsh, Mt. Union College, Albion, 
 Ohio : — 
 
 " My judgment is based on the accuracy and authority of the scientists 
 quoted. If inaccurate, I should sign No. III." 
 
 Prof. J. P. WiDNEY, President of the University of Southern Cali- 
 fornia, Los Angeles, Cal. 
 
 Prof. Francis J. Wagner, A. M., D. D., President of Morgan 
 College, Baltimore, Md. 
 
 Eev. J. C. Clapp, T>. D., President of Catawba College, Newton, N. C. 
 
 Eev. James W. Strong, President of Carleton College, Northfield, 
 Minn. 
 
 Eev. Wm. Henslee, President of Pierce Christian College, College 
 City, Cal. 
 
 Eev. Merle A. Breed, President of Benzonia College, Benzonia, 
 Mich. 
 
 President Isaac N. Eendall, Lincoln University, Lincoln, Pa. 
 
 President George Hindley, Eidgeville College, Eidgeville, Ind. : 
 " Absolute prohibition of vivisection until man is absolutely regenerated." 
 
 President Jas. T. Coote, A. M., Washington College, Tenn. 
 
 President J. P. Greene, D. D., LL. D., William Jewell College, 
 Liberty, Mo. 
 
 President Charles A. Blanc hard, Wheaton College, Wheaton, 111. 
 
 William H. Payne, LL. D., Chancellor of the University of Nash- 
 ville, Tenn. 
 
 Prof. Hiram Corson, LL. D., Professor of English Literature, 
 'Cornell University, Ithaca, N. Y. 
 
 Prof. Charles Mellen Tyler, A. M., D. D., Professor of Christian 
 Ethics, Cornell University, Ithaca, N. Y. 
 
 Prof. W. S. Tyler, D. D., LL. D., Professor of Greek, Amherst 
 College, Mass. 
 
 Prof. Harry T. Peck, A. M., Ph. D., Professor of Latin Language 
 and Literature, Columbia College, N. Y. 
 
 Prof. G. C. Wheeler, B. S., Ph. D., Chair of Chemistry, Cornell 
 University, Ithaca, N. Y. 
 
 Prof. S. G. Williams, A. B., Ph. D., Professor of the Art of Teach- 
 ing, Cornell University, Ithaca, N. Y. 
 
ABSOLUTE PEOHIBITION OF VIVISECTION. . 17 
 
 Prof. A. M. Wheeler, M. A., Professor of History, Yale Univer- 
 sity^ ^^w Haven, Conn. 
 
 Prof. Geokge B. Stevens, Ph. D., D. D., Professor of l^ew Testa- 
 ment Criticism, Yale University, New Haven, Conn, 
 
 Prof. William Cleaver Wilkinson, University of Chicago. 
 
 Prof. Edward Lee Greene, Catliolic University of America, 
 Washington, D. C. 
 
 Prof. Arvin S. Olin, University of Kansas. 
 
 Prof. Edward E. Hale, Jr., State University, Iowa : — 
 
 " I should much prefer to sign IT. or III., if it were not that I see no 
 practicable way of restricting vivisection. If it were possible to draw the 
 line between painful and painless vivisection, between needful and useless 
 vivisection, it would be almost impossible to have the line observed. If 
 any way could be shown that would surely accomplish this end, I should 
 sign III." 
 
 (Professor Hale erases all statements of fact which he has not means of 
 verifying.) 
 
 Prof. W. H. Savage, El Paso, Texas : — 
 
 " Under limitations it might do to delegate to a very few eminent men the 
 right to make some experiments; but such experiments should not be made 
 before a body of students. Even to advance science, we have no right to 
 torture animals." 
 
 Prof. James Otis Lincoln, San Mateo, Cal. 
 Prof. William E. Phelps, M. A., St. Paul, Minn. 
 Charles W. Stone, A. M. (Harvard), Boston. 
 Eev. Dr. PIiram C. Hayden, Vice-President of the Western Eeserve 
 University, Cleveland, Ohio : — 
 
 "Signed on strength of the testimony of the medical experts, quoted 
 above." 
 
 Prof. Nathan Abbott, LL. B., Professor of Law, Leland Stanford 
 Jr. University, Palo Alto, Cal. 
 
 M. L. Holbrook, M. D. (Prof. Hygiene in New 
 York Med. College. Editgr "Journal of 
 Hygiene,"), New York. 
 
 Julius F. Krug, M. D., Buffalo, N. Y. 
 
 Horace C. Taylor, M. D., Brockton, N. Y. 
 
 Isnac D. Meacham, M. D.. Binghanitou, N. Y. 
 
 Wm. P. Roberts, M. D., Minneapolis, Minn. 
 
 Herbert Beals, M. D., Buffalo, N. Y. 
 
 D. A. Dean,'M. D., Buffalo, N. Y. 
 
 E. A. Burnside, M. D., Buffalo, N. Y. 
 0. M. Frisbie, M. D., Bainbridge, N. Y. 
 G. H. R. Bennet, M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 P. Pryne, M. D., Herkimer, N. Y.: — 
 
 *! am opposed to vivisection under all cir- 
 cumstances, without reservation." 
 
 Jesse Myer, M. D., Kingston, N. Y.: — 
 " The sentiments of the statement for 
 ' Vivisection without restrictions ' are 
 appropriate to tlie Dark Ages. The bar- 
 barism of the Turk would blush to hear 
 them." 
 
 Howard Wetmore, M. D., New York City. 
 
 Peter B. Wyckoff, M. D., New York City. 
 
 Thos. M. Dillingham, M. D., New York Cit3\ 
 
 Follansbee G. Welch, M. D., New York City. 
 
 Lewis Hallock, M. D., New York City. 
 
 Luigi Galvani Doane, M. D., New York City. 
 
 Jas. R. Bird, A. M., M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 
 Christian Enrich, M. D., New York City. 
 
 Addison C. Fletcher, M. D., New York City, 
 
18 
 
 ABSOLUTE PEOHIBITION OF VIVISECTION. 
 
 Jas. H. Patton, A. M., M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 William P. Morrissj-, M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 B. Fincke, M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 Jas. E. Ruseell, M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 Jas. Murphy, M. D., Sherman, N. Y. 
 Jas. P. Hawes, M. D., North Hector, Schuyler 
 
 Co., N, Y. 
 Hiram C. Driggs, M. D., New York City. 
 Wm. G. Hartley, M. D., New York City. 
 S. B. Childs, M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 John Cooper, M. D., M. K. C. S., Brooklyn, 
 
 New York. 
 Geo. W. Newman, M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 
 B. B. Roberts, M. D., Buffalo, N.Y. 
 John F. Wage, M. D., Buffalo, N. Y. 
 F. W. Stilwell, M. D., Rochester, N. Y. 
 John H. Eden, M. D. (Yale, 1874), Fordiiam 
 
 Heights, N. Y. 
 Thos. B. Herimstreet, M. D., Troy, N. Y. 
 
 C. E. Eraser, M. D., Rome, N. Y. 
 John Reid, M. D., Rochester, N. Y. 
 
 A. R. Green, M. D., Troy, N. Y. 
 Herman Beyer, M. D., Stapleton, N. Y. 
 
 W. W. Archer, M. D., Clifton Springs, N.Y. 
 Wilson T. Bassett, M. D., Cooperstown,N. Y. 
 
 B. C. Andrews, M. D., Dansville, N. Y. 
 David J. Mallery, M. D., Bristol Centre, N. Y. 
 
 B. D. Mosher, M. D., Granville, N. Y. 
 W. W. Whiting, M. D., Union, N. Y. 
 W. E. Gorton, M. D., Corning, N. Y. 
 Theodore C. Wallace, M. D., Cambridge, 
 
 New York. 
 
 C. J. Farley, M. D., Sandy Hill, N. Y. 
 William C. Cooke, M. D., Moravia, N. Y. 
 Peter H. Hulst, M. D., Greenwich, N. Y. 
 Albert H. Crump, M. D., Williams Bridge, 
 
 New York. 
 W. D. 0. K. Strong, M. D., Fi<hkilI-on-Hud- 
 
 son, N. Y. 
 C. V. H. Morris, M. D., Lodi, N. Y. 
 J. J. Aliman, M. D., Union Springs, N. Y. 
 J. B. Hartwell, M. D., Woodsburgh, N. Y. 
 W. W. Budlong, M. D., Frankfort, N. Y. 
 Newton Cook, M. D., Sandy Creek, N. Y. 
 R. R. Thompson, M. D., Kingston, N. Y. 
 James H.Rogers, M.D., East Hampton, N.Y. : 
 '* The vivisector is only less guilty than the 
 man or woman who kills or maims an 
 animal for amusement, or in obedience 
 to the dictates of fashion." 
 
 Jos. Sidney Crane, M. D., Huntington, N. Y. 
 Charles T. Mitchel, M. D., Canandaigua, N.Y. 
 Horace Halbert, M. D., Canastota, N. Y. 
 Wm. G. Ware, M. D., Dedham, Mass. 
 C. K. Beldin, M. D., Jamaica, N. T. 
 C. T. Greenleaf, M. D., Brewerton, N. Y. 
 A. J. Evans, M. D., Fredonia, N. Y. 
 
 Ezra McDougall, M. D. (Univ. Med. Coll.- 
 N. Y.), Oneonta, N. Y. : — 
 '■ I have never derived anj- benefit from the 
 practice of vivisection." 
 
 Wm. M. Gwynn, M.D., ThroopsviUe, N. Y. 
 
 J. Fenimore Niver, M. D., Cambridge, N. Y. 
 
 Ira D. Brown, M. D., Weedsport, N. Y.: — 
 "Every word in the above statement I 
 know to be true. The practice of vivi- 
 section is inhuman, cruel, and brutal- 
 izing in its effects upon those who 
 witness it, wliile no information useful 
 to the human family is gained from it. 
 In our medical colleges it is indulged 
 in as a sport, a pastime, to the moral 
 degradation of the students, making 
 thein unfit for the practice of the heal- 
 ing art." 
 
 Geo. A. Stuart, M. D. (Harvard), Oyster Bay, 
 Queens Co., N. Y. 
 
 T. J. Peer, M. D., Ontario, N. Y. 
 
 T. J. Kilmer, M. D., Schoharie, N. Y. 
 
 Jas. S. Raymond, M. D., Ogdensburg, N. Y. 
 
 John Vedder, M. D., Saugerties, N. Y. 
 
 H. J. Nims, M. D., Manlius, N, Y. 
 
 Dr. L. Jeschinsky, M. D., Mt. Vernon, N. Y. 
 
 A. B. Carpenter, M. D., N. Greece, N. Y. 
 Chas. E. Smith, M. D., Wiiitesboro, N. Y. 
 Samuel S. Wallian, M. D., Helix, San Diego 
 
 Co., Cal. 
 
 Sarah E. Wilder, M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 
 Alice Borle Campbell, M. D., Brooklyn, N.Y. 
 (member of the consulting staff of the 
 jMemorial Hospital, Brooklyn, and mem- 
 ber of the consulting staff of the New York 
 Medical College and Hospital for Women). 
 
 Adele A. Gleason, M. D., Elmira, N. Y. 
 
 Sarah E. Bissell, M. D., New York City. : — 
 '' Vivisection is useless, degrading, bru- 
 talizing." 
 
 Georgiana M. Crosby, M. D., New York City. 
 
 Eliza Ellinwood, M. D., Rome, N. Y. 
 
 Rachel T. Speakman, M. D., West Chester, Pa. 
 
 Jeannette B. Greene. M. D., New York City. 
 
 S. A. Skinner, M. D., Hoosac Falls, N. Y. 
 
 (Miss) S. S. Nivison, M. D., Dryden. N. Y. 
 
 Miles B. .Jones, M. D., Camden, N. Y. 
 
 P. Rebekah Johnson, M. D., New York City. 
 
 Mary Siade, M. D., Castile, N. Y. 
 
 L. S. Sprague, M. D., Williamson, N. Y. 
 
 B. F. Underwood, M. D., Arlington, N. J. 
 D. S. Woodworth, M. D., Fitchburg, Mass. 
 
 I. Eaton Chase, A. M., M. D., Haverhill, Mass. 
 A. Houghton Kimball, M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 Francis M. Cragin, M. D., Norwood, ^Mass. 
 M. H. Williams, M. D.. New York City. 
 John F. Miller, M. D,, New York City. 
 
ABSOLUTE PEOHIBITION OF VIVISECTION. 
 
 19 
 
 W. H. Krause, M. D., New York City. 
 Julin D. QuacJienbos, M. D., New York Citj'. 
 James Neil, M. U., New York Cit}- (I^xainin- 
 
 iiig Surgeon for the U. S. Pension Bureau 
 
 from 18G2 to 1867). 
 Franz Heuel, M. D., New York City. 
 M. A. B. Mount, M. D., New York City. 
 H. Clay Paddock, M. D., New York City. 
 Matthew Woods, M. D., Philadelphia, Pa. 
 T. Griswold Comstock, A. M , M. D., Ph.D., 
 
 St. Louis, Mo. 
 W. A. Earle, M. D., Chairman of the Board of 
 
 Health, West Boylston, Mass. 
 James P. Broderick, M. D., Jamaica Plain, 
 
 Mass. 
 Daniel D. Slade, M. D., Chestnut Hill, Mass. 
 E. Herbert No3'es, M. D., West Gloucester, 
 
 Mass. 
 G. Colburn Clement, M. D., Haverhill, Mass. 
 James P. Elliot, M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 Caroline E. Hastings, M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 Charles H. Shackford, M. D., Physician and 
 
 Surgeon, Frost Hospital, Chelsea, Mass. 
 N. G. Macomber, M. D., "Westport, Mass. 
 Francis J. Stevens, M. D., Boxford, Mass. 
 James D. Judge, M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 John B. Tyler, M. D., Billerica, JMass. 
 Alfred L. S. Morand, M. D., Jamaica Plain, 
 
 Mass. 
 Drs. Sturtevant and Hallowell, Hyde Park, 
 
 Mass. 
 James Warwick, M. D., Worcester, Mass. 
 J. B. Conklin, M. D., Albany, N. Y. 
 Sarah E. Sherman, M. D., Salem, Mass. 
 Julia B. Wood, M. D., Worcester, Mass. 
 Charlotte Evans Page, M. D., Lowell, Mass. 
 Harriet N. Watson, M. D., Albion, N. Y. 
 Wm. M. Moore, M. D., Provincetown^ Mass. 
 J. G. Johnson, M. D., Wellfleet, Mass. 
 William R. Hayden, M. D., Bedford Springs, 
 
 Mass. : — 
 " Vivisection serves no good purpose; and I 
 agree with Dr. Bigelow." 
 Henry R. Brissett, M. D., Lowell, Mass. 
 
 B. Hubbard, M. D., Plymouth, Mass. 
 Walter E. Harvey, M. D., Cambridgeport, 
 
 Mass. 
 Walter S. Hall, M. D., Medford. IMass. 
 M. F. Delano, M. D., Late Surgeon of the 
 
 U. S. Armv, Sandwich, Mass. 
 L. V Gibbs, M. D., Worthington, Mass. 
 
 C. T. Stanle}-, M. D., Amesbury, .Mass. 
 G. E. White, M. D., Sandwich," Mass. : — 
 
 " The first statement more accurately meets 
 my views than any other. There may 
 be circumstances where it would, be of 
 great benefit." 
 
 John T. Harris, M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 J. B. Andrews, M. D., Lynn, Mass. 
 James B. Bell, M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 Homer S. Bell, M. D., Granby, Mass. 
 Bj'ron R. Harmon, M. D., Woburn, Mass. 
 Charles Kingsbury, M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 George H. Payne, M. D., Boston, Mass. • 
 Charles E. Nichols, M. D., Boston, Mass. ' 
 Marcus F. Bridgman, M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 
 E. J. Gooding, M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 
 Z. A. Spendley, M. D., Ciienango Forks, N. Y. 
 Nathaniel M. Freeman, M. D., New York City. 
 George F. Oertel, M. D., New York City. 
 
 F. E. Martindale, M.D., Port Richmond, N.Y. 
 J. M. Turner, M. D., Lyons, N. Y. 
 Adelbert D. Head, M. D., Syracuse, N. Y. 
 Gilbert R. .Traver, M. D., Perry, N. Y. 
 David Edward Collins, M. D., Medway, N. Y. 
 Thos. W. Bennett, M. D., Jeffersonville, N. Y. 
 Elizabeth H. Bates, M. D., Port Chester, N. Y. : 
 
 "Operations can be done on dogs and other 
 animals that owing to differences in 
 organs cannot be done on human 
 beings. Vivisection may show curious 
 things, but at the expense of the inhu- 
 manity of man." 
 
 T. S. Quick, M. D., Carrollton, N. Y. ' 
 
 Chas. O. Hawkins, M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 
 James I. Marcley, M. D., Buffalo, N. Y. 
 
 Timothy Dwight Stow, M. D., Mexico, N. Y. 
 
 H. Hadley Smith, M.'D., Hudson, N. Y. 
 
 A. B. Rice, M. D., Jamestown, N. Y. 
 
 J. F. Cleveland, M. D., Le Roy, N. Y. 
 
 A. C. Miller, M. D., Turin, N." Y. 
 
 John Murphy, M. D., New York City. 
 
 Fred C. Robin.son, M. D., New York Git}'. 
 
 Dr. Edward Frankell, M. D., Consulting 
 Surgeon to the City Hospital, New York 
 City. 
 
 J. W. Ferris, M. D., Mount Vernon, N. Y. 
 
 Alfred Large, M. D., Great Barrington, Mass. 
 
 Charles M. Brockway, M. D. (College Physi- 
 cian and Surgeon, New York), Worcester, 
 Mass. 
 
 Thomas B. Shaw, LL.B., M. D. (Harvard), 
 Lowell, Mass. 
 
 Edgar Leroy Draper, A. M., M. D. (Harvard), 
 Holyoke, Mass. 
 
 John H. Keyser, Hartford, Conn. 
 
 M. M. Averill, M. D., Lynn, Mass. 
 
 Stephen Witt, M. D., North Dana, Mass. 
 
 S. Saltmarsh, M. D., Lexington, INIass. 
 
 G. W. Burdett, M. D., Clinton, Mass. 
 William P„ Burge, M. D., Westfield, Mass. 
 C. H. Harriman, M. D., Whitinsville, Mass 
 A. C. Lane, M. D., West Medford, Mass. 
 Horace M. Nash, M. D., Lancaster, Mass. 
 
20 
 
 ABSOLUTE PROHIBITION OF VIVISECTION. 
 
 Edward T. Tucker, M. D., New Bedford, 
 Mass. 
 
 Thomas A. Capen, M. D,, Fall River, Mass. 
 
 Colby Lamb, M. D., Salem, Mass. 
 
 Benj. Benoit, M. D., Lowell, Mass.: — 
 
 "Have always looked upon vivisection as 
 . cruel in the extreme." 
 
 Lorenzo Waite, A. M., M. D., Pittstield, Mass. 
 
 William L. Johnson, M. D., Uxbridge, Mass. 
 
 Seth W. Kelley, A. M., M. D., Woburn, 
 Mass. 
 
 C. "W. Bowen, M. D., Westfield, Mass. 
 
 David W. Hodgkiiis, M. D., East Brookfield, 
 Mass. 
 
 Rosto O. "Wood, M. D., Worcester, Mass. 
 
 Charles F. Sherman, M. I)., Haverhill, Mass. 
 
 George A. Coburn, A. M., M. D., Cambridge, 
 Mass. 
 
 v. L. Owen, M. D., Springfield, Mass. 
 
 Isaac Thorndike Hunt, M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 
 Marshall L. Brown, M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 
 Rev. Dr. Robert R. Booth, New York City. 
 
 Rev. Dr. Arthur Brooks, New York City. 
 
 Rev. Dr. Chas. E. Robinson, Scranton, Pa. 
 
 Rev. Dr. J. Clement French, Newark, N. J. 
 
 Rev. Dr. James B. Gregg, Colorado Springs. 
 
 Rev. Dr. Burdett Hart, New Haven, Conn. 
 
 Rev. Dr. H. Nelson Hollifield, Newark, N. J. 
 
 Rev. Dr. John R. Davies, New York City. 
 
 Rev. Dr. John V. L. Reynolds, Meadville,Pa. 
 
 Rev. Dr. Levi Parsons, Mt. Morris, N. Y. 
 
 Rev. Dr. William C. Hopkins, Toledo, Ohio. 
 
 Rev. Dr. C. H. Rogers, Oklahoma City. 
 
 Rev. Dr. Alex Kent, Washington, D. C. 
 
 Rev. Dr. Francis E. Miller, Paterson, N.J. 
 
 Rev. Dr. John W. Brown, New York City. 
 
 Rev. Dr. Epher "Whitaker, Southold, New- 
 York. 
 
 Rev. Dr. Robert Court, Lowell, Mass.: — 
 "M}' mind has hovered between I. and II.," 
 but has finally resolved to I. as safest, 
 most humane, and most in accordance 
 with the mind of Him who ' made and 
 loveth all.' " 
 
 Rev. Dr. Charles J. Jones, Stapleton, N. Y. 
 
 Rev. Dr. Dewitt M. Benham, Ph. D., Pitts- 
 burg, Pa. 
 
 Rev. Dr. D. Hall, Indiana. Pa. 
 
 Rev. Dr. James Henry Ecob, Albany, N. Y. 
 
 Rev. Dr. Rhys G. Jones, Utica, N. Y. 
 
 Rev. Dr. A. St.- John Chambr^, Arch-Deacon 
 of Lowell, Mass. 
 
 Rev. Dr. James J. Biird, Utica, N. Y. 
 
 Rev. Dr. Joseph il. Clarke, Syracuse, N. Y. 
 
 Rev. Dr. Edmund B. Willson, Salem, Mass. 
 
 Rev. Dr. Edward T. Fairbanks, St. Johns- 
 bury, Vermont. 
 
 Rev. John A. Bellows, Portland, Maine. 
 
 Rev. James Kay Applebee, Allston, Mass. 
 
 Rev. Otis A. Glazebrook, Elizabeth, N. J. 
 
 Rev. Geo. Augustine Thayer, Cincinnati, Ohio. 
 
 Rev. Frederick S. Sill, Cohoes, N. Y. 
 
 Rev. Ithamar W. Beard, Dover, N. H. : — 
 " I indorse this view, not only on account 
 of the pain inflicted, but more especially 
 because of the statement that ' vivi- 
 section deadens humanity.' I can con- 
 ceive no benefit that can come to our 
 race commensurate with -this great 
 harm." 
 
 Rev. Ernest Smith, M. A., Baltimore, Md. 
 
 Rev. James Holwell, Kioder, Owego, N. Y. 
 
 Rev. Robert Hudson, Svracuse, N. Y. 
 
 Rev. Stephen Peebles, Satauk, Colorado. 
 
 Rev. James H. Darlington, Bi'ookh-n, N. Y. 
 
 Rev. Floyd W. Tompkins, Jr., Providence, R.I. 
 
 Rev. Dr. Joshua Young, Groton, Mass. 
 
 Rev. William Brunton, B. D. (Harvard), 
 "Whitman, Mass. 
 
 Rev. A. J. Chapin, Omaha, Neb. 
 
 Rev. E. M. Hiclvok, Sharon, Mass.: — 
 
 "No permanent good results can come to 
 humanity from such violation of God's 
 law of love." 
 
 Rev. John T. Rose, Cazenovia, New York. : ' 
 " If it were within my power, I should 
 absolutely prohibit vivisection, and 
 visit the crime with legal and social 
 penalties." 
 
 Rev. George G. Perrine, Guildford, N. Y. 
 
 Rev. T. Lewis Banister, New Hartford, N Y. : 
 "No human being has the right to inflict 
 torture upon an inferior order of beings 
 incapable of determining aud express- 
 ing voluntary choice. If, however, any 
 heroic human being in full possession 
 of all his reasoning faculties, ascertained 
 as such by such legal process as deter- 
 mines cases of insanity by due exami- 
 nation, who at the time of sucli exanii- 
 nation, after being pronounced sane, 
 declares his willingness to become a 
 martyr to science, — let him." 
 
 Rabbi L. "V^'eiss, Columbus, Ohio. 
 Rabbi Henry Cohen, Galveston, Texas. 
 Rabbi Max Wertheimer, Dayton, Ohio. 
 Rev. D. R. Hardison, Italy, Texas. 
 Rev. C. R. D. Crittenton, Chicago, 111. 
 Rev. John C. Kimball, Hartford, Conn. 
 (Adds, " and by appeals to reason,' senti- 
 ment, and moral principle.") 
 Rev. Stephen H. Camp, Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 Rev. James Huxtable, Boston, Mass. 
 
ABSOLUTE PROHIBITION OF VIVISECTION. 
 
 21 
 
 Rev. James De Nonnandie, Boston, Mass. 
 
 Rev. Archdeacon Gilbert F. Williams, Wash- 
 ington, D. C. 
 
 Rev. Archdeacon J. D. Morrison, D. D., 
 LL. D., Ogdensburg. 
 
 Rev. E. F. H. J. Masse, B. A., Oxon., Chicago. 
 
 Rev. Hobart Cooke, Plattsburg, N. Y. 
 
 Rev. George Clark Houghton, U. D., Hoboken. 
 
 Rev. Eaton W. Maxc_v, Troj', N. Y. 
 
 Rev. Nathan F. Whiting, Cape Vincent, N. Y. 
 
 Rev. Dr. S. W. Miller, Saltsburg, Pa. : — 
 " For j'ears I favored II. Could I believe 
 it practicable, I might still favor it; 
 but the seeming impossibility of making 
 it so. the liability to abuse in the hands 
 of unprincipled persons, and the fact 
 that in many cases the use of anoes- 
 thetics defeats the purpose, compels me 
 to adopt 1." 
 
 Rev. F. N. Palmer, Pueblo, Colo. 
 
 Rev. Geo. W. Chalfant, D. D., Pittsburg, Pa. 
 
 Rev. Theodore F. Wright, Cambridge, Mass. 
 
 Rev. Joseph Dunn Burrell, Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 
 Rev. Randolph H. McKim, Wasliington, D. C. 
 
 Rev. Chas. F. J. VVrigley, M.A., Buffalo, N. Y. 
 
 Rev. William Marshall, Coudersport. Pa. 
 
 Rev. James Alex. Dickson, Governor's 
 Island, N. Y. 
 
 Rev. Charles M. Armstrong, West Phila- 
 delphia, Pa. 
 
 Rev. William Cooke, Oriskany, N. Y. 
 
 Rev. David S. McCaslin, D. D., Minneapolis, 
 Minnesota. 
 
 Rev. James N. Chalmers, Lonsdale, R. I. 
 
 Rev. Percy Stickney Grant, New York City. 
 
 Rev. F. P. Berry, Maryville, Mo. 
 
 Rev. Benjamin F. Matran, A.M., Chicago, 111. : 
 "Vivisection degrades — superinduces bru- 
 tality and indifference to pain of 
 others." 
 
 Rev. Wm. A. McCorker, Detroit, Mich. : — 
 " Unless vivisection is absolutely necessary 
 to protect human life and to guard 
 against human suffering, I am perfectly 
 clear that it should not be practised. 
 Whether there is ever such necessity I 
 hardly feel competent to decide. If there 
 ever is such occasion for its practice, it 
 should be rendered painless. I think 
 my place is with those absolutely pro- 
 hibiting it." 
 
 Rav. Wm. C. Pond, San Francisco, Cal. 
 Rev. Washington R. Laird, West Chester, Pa. 
 Rev. Lester L. West, D.D., Winona, Minn. 
 Rev. Elwell 0. Mead, A. M., Burton, Ohio. 
 Rev. J. C. Ely, Xenia, Ohio. 
 
 Rev. Elisha Gifford, Cambridge, Mass. : — 
 " We believe that animals have rights and 
 should be protected from cruelty : the 
 inhumanity and barbarism of vivisec- 
 tion seem certain, its good effects are 
 doubtful ; the first position therefore 
 seems to us the correct one, that the 
 practice should be abolished, under 
 pains and penalties." 
 
 Rev. Albert F. Pierce, Danbury, Conn. : — 
 " I cannot indorse all in the statement made 
 above. My opinion is that no such 
 benefit results from vivisection as war- 
 rants the practice of it; therefore my 
 judgment as well as my sj'mpathies are 
 strong!}' against it. /fit cun be shown 
 that great good has resulted to human 
 life either in the treatment of or preven- 
 tion of disease, which good could not 
 have come through other methods of 
 investigation, then I should favor the 
 ' second ' statement, but under the 
 most stringent regulations. But it will 
 take a great deal more evidence than I 
 have yet seen to produce such a convic- 
 tion in my own mind. For this reason 
 I am strongly opposed to vivisection in 
 any form." 
 
 Rev. F. A. Warfield, Brockton, Mass. ' 
 
 Rev. J. T. Sunderland, A. M., Ann Arbor, 
 Michigan. 
 
 Mrs. Eliza R. Sunderland, Teacher of His- 
 tory, Ann Arbor, Mich. 
 
 Rev. John H. Morison, D. D., Boston, Mass. : 
 "I should prefer to sign No. II. were it 
 not that, when once engaged in vivi- 
 section without pain, the operator is 
 veiy liable to be carried beyond his 
 expectations." 
 
 Rev. E. C. Butler, Quiney, Mass. 
 
 Rev. J. M. G. Foster, Bangor, Maine. 
 
 Rev. J. F. Loba, Evanston, III. 
 
 Rev. Wm. M. Jones, St. Louis, Mo. 
 
 Rev. D. H. Temple, Los Gatos, Cal. 
 
 Rev. J. Edw. Rielly, Hancock, Mich. 
 
 Rev. David Stuart Hamilton, Columbia, Pa. 
 
 Rev. Edwin Pond Parker, Hartford, Conn. 
 
 Rev. Jos. S. Jenckes, Indianapolis, Ind. 
 
 Rev. Daniel L. Furber, Newton Centre, Mass 
 
 Rev. Thomas H. Cocroft, Providence, R. I. 
 
 Rev. Edward C. Porter. Watertown, Mass. 
 
 Rev. Edward Norton, Quiney, Mass. 
 
 Rev. S. Wright Butler, D. D., Omaha, Neb. 
 
 Rev. Albert Buel Vorse, Wellesley Hills. 
 
 Rev. P. A. Gleason, Wakeman, Ohio. 
 
 Rev. Wm. Wallace, Calumet, Mich. 
 
 Rev. Chas. Addison Northup, Norwich, Conn. 
 
22 
 
 ABSOLUTE PROHIBITION OF VIVISECTION. 
 
 Rev. George A. Tewksbury, Concord, Mass. 
 Rev. George M. Bartol, Lancaster, Mass. 
 Rev.Dr.Tlioinas C.Easton, Washington, D. C. 
 Rev. Asher Anderson, Meriden, Conn. 
 Rev. J. S. Plunier, Cadiz, Ohio. 
 Henry S. Clubb, Editoi', Philadelphia, Pa. 
 Rev.W. Moore Jones, M. A., Murphysboro, 111. 
 Rev. Arthur W. Spooner, Camden, N. J. 
 (Erases 1st sentence of 2d paragraph.) 
 Rev. Dr. Henry B. Cromwell, Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 Rev. Eugene A. Johnson, Washington. D. C. 
 Rev. Walter II. Waygood, Schenectady, N. Y. 
 Rev. William Rounseville Alger, Author, 
 
 Boston, Mass. 
 Rev. Newniiin Hall, D. D., Vine House, 
 
 Hanipstead, London, Eng. 
 Mark W. Harrington, Chief of Weather 
 
 Bureau, Washington, D. C. 
 James Jeffrey Roche, Editor of " The Pilot,'' 
 Boston, Mass. : — 
 " I do not believe that even an advocate of 
 ' unrestricted vivisection ' should be 
 subjected to the mercy of his fellow 
 vivisectors ; but therein, perhaps, I err 
 on the side of tenderness." 
 
 Rev. George Hughes, Editor of " The Chris- 
 tian Standard," Philadelphia, Pa. 
 Rev. James O. S. Huntington, Westminster, 
 Maryland: — 
 " There seems to be an increasing tendency 
 on the part of people at large to act as 
 though the principal reason for being on 
 this planet were to continue to exist in 
 the life of this world. I believe that the 
 ver}' opposite is true; that man exists in 
 order to die, and through death to find 
 life." 
 Rev. John A. Bevington, B. D., Barnstable, 
 
 Mass. 
 Rev. H. D. Lathrop, A. M., D.D., St. Helena, 
 
 California. 
 Rev. ,Jas. H. Denny, V. P., A. H. A.. Roch- 
 ester, N. Y. . 
 Rev. John T. G. Nichols, S.T. D., Cambridge, 
 Mass. : — 
 "I heartily indorse the above without 
 change or qualification. I regard vivi- 
 section as one of the most monstrous 
 wrongs and cruelties of our times." 
 
 Rev, F. R. Farrand, A. B., San Francisco, Cal. 
 
 Rev. Myron W. Reed, Denver, Colo. 
 
 Rev. Francis J. Clerc, D. D., Philipsburg, 
 
 Penn. 
 Rev. J. F. Packard, Author and Editor of 
 
 "^Messiah's Herald," Walnut Hill, Mass. 
 Rev. W. Simonton, D. D., Emmittsburg, Md. 
 
 Rev. George McClellan Fiske, D. D., Provi- 
 dence, R. I. 
 
 Rev. Charles D. Bell, D. D., Cheltenham, 
 England. 
 
 Clara B. Colijy, Editor, Washington, D. C. 
 
 P. W. Raidobough, Editor, Chicago, 111. 
 
 J. A. Mitchell, Editor, New York City. 
 
 C. A. Bickford, Editor, Boston, Mass.' 
 
 E. C. Townsend, Editor, New York City. 
 
 Henry B. Williams, Bristol, Vt. 
 
 Hon. Rowland B. Mahany, JM. C, Washing- 
 ton, D. C. 
 
 Prof. Geo. L. Collie, Beloit College, Beloit, 
 Wisconsin. 
 
 Prof. J. L. Patterson, Union College, Schenec- 
 tady, N. Y. 
 
 Hon. Geo. C. Crowthers, St. Joseph, Mo. 
 
 Hon. J. E. Jones, G'^'^'ernor of Nevada. 
 
 Hon. J. E. Rickards, Governor of Montana. 
 
 Hon. Mat Hoke, Nashville, Tenn. 
 
 John T. Dale, Esq., Chicago, 111. 
 
 A. S. Pratt, Pres. Washington Humane Soc, 
 
 Washington, D. C. 
 Hon. Rufus Dane, Mobile, Alabama. 
 Henry D. Lloyd, Editor of the ''Chicago 
 
 Tribune," Chicago, 111. 
 
 B, O. Flower, Editor of " The Arena," Boston, 
 
 Mass. 
 Mrs. Robert Treat Paine, Boston, Mass. 
 Mrs. Grace S. Voorhees, W. Winsted, Conn.: 
 "After having had an extended course in 
 college in vivisection under a Christian 
 professor." 
 W. J. Brewster, Hannibal, N. Y. 
 Henry S. Salt, Author, London. 
 "Ouida," Author, Florence. Italj'. 
 Chas. H. Grandgent, A. B., Director of Modern 
 Language Instruction in the Boston Public 
 Schools, Cambridge, Mass. 
 Prof. J. Seymour Slie, A.]M.,Topeka, Kansas. 
 Willard J. Hull, Esq., Minneapolis, INIinn. 
 
 D. O'Loughlin, Editor of the "Twentieth 
 Centurv," New York City. 
 
 Hon. W. A. Peffer, U. S. Senator, Kansas. 
 
 Hon. Dennis M. Hurley, M. C, Brooklyn, 
 New York. 
 
 Hon. Jove L. Johnson, M. C, Sacramento, 
 California. 
 
 Hon. Jacob H. Gallinger, M. D., U. S. Sena- 
 tor, N. H. 
 
 Hon. Thomas W. Palmer, Ex-Senator from 
 Michigan. 
 
 Hon. Th. ]\IcEwan, Jr., Member of Congress, 
 New Jersey. 
 
 Hon. Elijah A. Jlorse, Member of Congress, 
 Mass. 
 
 Hon. L. M. Strong, M. C, Ohio. 
 
VIVISECTION ALLOWABLE IF WITHOUT PAIN. 
 
 23 
 
 Hon. J. D. Leighty, M. C, Ind. 
 Byron B. Northrup, Esq., Racine, Wis. 
 Charles A. Haniliu, Esq., Syracuse, N. Y. 
 Cliristoplier Roberts, Esq., Newark, N. J. 
 R. H. Carotliers, Associate Editor of "The 
 
 Southern School," Louisville, Ken. 
 James P. Magenis, Esq., Editor of the " Adams 
 
 Freeman," Adams, Mass. 
 H. L. Green,Esq.,Editor of the "FreeThought 
 Magazine," Chicago, 111. 
 "I settle this question in my own mind the 
 same way that Garrison settled the 
 slavery question : ' As I knew it was 
 wrong to sell my children on the auction 
 block, I decided from that it would be 
 wrong to sell an}' other man's children.' 
 So I say, ' I would allow no cruel treat- 
 ment on any living creature that I 
 
 would not permit on my own chil- 
 dren.' " 
 
 Prof. James Otis Lincoln, San Mateo, Cal. 
 
 Prof. W. C. Esty, Amherst, JIass. 
 
 Prof. B. D. Cockrill, Pres. Trinity University, 
 Tehuacana, Texas. 
 
 Mrs. Olive Thorne Miller, Bird Student and 
 Author, Brooklyn, Mass. 
 
 Miss Louise Imogen Guiney, Writer, Auburn- 
 dale, Mass. 
 
 Mrs. Elizabeth Stuait Phelps Ward, Author, 
 Newton Centre, Mass. 
 
 Mr. Herbert D. Ward, Author. 
 
 Warren Lee Goss, Author, Norwich, Conn. 
 
 Edward Maitland, Esq., Author, London, 
 England. 
 
 C. W. Emerson, Emerson College of Oratory, 
 Boston, Mass. 
 
 11. VIVISECTION ALLOWABLE IF WITHOUT PAIN. 
 
 Whether that experimentation upon living animals known as 
 Vivisection is justifiable or not, depends, in our judgment, exclusively 
 on the (juestloii of pain. Utility alone cannot give Science lier 
 authority; for then might she ask, -as she sometimes has already 
 done, for the living bodies of the criminal, the idiot, or the savage, 
 wherein to search for the mysteries of life. We believe that Man's 
 dominion over the animated world beneath him is not absolute; that 
 the power to kill does not cover the right to torture; that our power 
 is responsible; that our Humanity invests us with certain moral 
 obligations toward the lower forms of life; and that under these 
 Man is not free to treat even the scorpion or the tiger as they might 
 treat him. But the use of chloroform and ether have made it pos- 
 sible to perform certain experiments and demonstrations upon liv- 
 ing animals without the slightest pain, and these only we regard as 
 justifiable for demonstration or research. 
 
 The dangers of this practice, however, are so many, the tempta- 
 tions to excess are so strong, the abuses to which it has led are so 
 notorious and deplorable, that the decision of this question of pain 
 should not be left to the judgment of each experimenter; but the 
 whole practice, like the study of human anatomy with dissection, 
 should be regulated by definite laws, confined to certain objects, 
 permitted only to competent and trustworthy persons, and restricted 
 to licensed places which shall be open at all times to inspection by 
 the Presidents of Humane Societies for Protection of Animals or 
 their authorized representatives. 
 
24 . VIVISECTION ALLOWABLE IF WITHOUT PAIN. 
 
 Albert L. Gihon, A. M., M. D., Medical Director, U. S. Navy, 
 in charge of the U. S. Naval Hospital, Washington, D. C. 
 
 Prof. Henry M. Field, M. D., Emeritus Professor of Therapeutics, 
 Dartmouth Medical College : • — 
 
 " I give the above my emphatic approval. But if vivisection thus re- 
 stricted and guarded is not attainable, I should affix my signature to No. I." 
 
 Clinton Wagner, M. D., Senior Surgeon of the Metropolitan 
 Throat Hospital, New York City : — 
 
 " Vivisection may be allowable if without pain and performed by the 
 Professor or his licensed assistants, and only in the laboratories of incorpo- 
 rated ?«edica/ schools." 
 
 W. C. BouTON, A. B., M. D., Clinical Instructor in Neurology at 
 the Northwestern University Medical School, Chicago, 111. : — 
 
 " I do not believe that. vivisection should be wholly dispensed with, for I 
 believe that we can still gain some valuable knowledge from it. But I believe, 
 as stated, that it should be without pain, regulated by definite laws, confined 
 to certain objects, permitted only to competent and trustworthy persons, and 
 restricted to licensed places which shall be open at all times to ins])ection by 
 the Presidents, or their authorized representatives, of Humane Societies for 
 Protection of Animals." 
 
 Prof. H. B. Cummins, M. D., Professor of Physiology, Lincoln, 
 Nebraska. 
 
 Prof. Franklin Townsend,' A. M,, M. D., Professor of Physiology, 
 Albany Medical College, Albany, N. Y. 
 
 Prof. J. C. Hartzell, Jr., M.S., Professor of Biology, Claflin Uni- 
 versity, Orangeburg, S. C. 
 
 Prof. J. H. Etheridge, A. M., M. D., Professor of Obstetrics and 
 Gynsecology, Push Medical College, Chicago, 111. 
 
 Prof. H. D. Champlin, M. D., Professor of Nervous Diseases, Cleve- 
 land University of Medicine and Surgery, Cleveland, Ohio : — 
 
 " I do not believe in these cases any tyro should be allowed to vivisect ; 
 nor do I believe in vivisection just to verify old experiments. Unless 
 something of great value is to be gained in a scientific way, it should be for- 
 bidden even under the influence of an anaesthetic." 
 
 Prof. W. T. Wenzell, M. D., Ph. D., Professor of Chemistry, etc., 
 University of California, San Francisco, Cal. 
 
 Eev. Frederic E. Marvin, M. D., Troy, N. Y. : — 
 
 " I believe vivisection should be allowable in cases where pain may be 
 avoided, and then only as conducted by experts for some definite end of 
 sufficient consequence. It should never be allowed for mere purposes of 
 demonstration, or as a method of instruction in the class-room or in the medi- 
 cal college." 
 
 (In another letter to the Association, Dr. Marvin says : " Though now a 
 minister of the Gospel, I was educated to the profession of medicine and was 
 
VIVISECTIOX ALLOWABLE IF WITHOUT PAIN. . 25 
 
 graduated from the College of Physicians and Surgeons, ' Medical Depart- 
 ment of Columbia College, N. Y.,' in 1870. In the class-room I saw vivisec- 
 tions so unqualifiedly cruel that even now they remain in my memory as a 
 niofhtmare. I am persuaded that none of the so-called experiments upon 
 living animals that I witnessed were of any real value to me or to my fellow- 
 students.") 
 
 A. K Brockway, a. M., M. D., New York City : — 
 
 " My opinion is that no experimenter should inflict pain on any animal 
 jvhich he loould not himself he willing to suffer in the same cause.^' 
 
 William Wallace Gardnek, M. D., Springfield, Mass. : — 
 
 " I believe it useful under proper restrictions to save human suffering. 
 What I should he willing to suffer voluntarily, the lotoer order of animals should 
 be ohliged to suffer for humanity's sake." 
 
 W. S. Tremaine, M. D., Buffalo, N. Y. : — 
 
 " Personally, I would rather perform vivisection on human beings than 
 on the lower animals, for the reason that the object can be made intelligent 
 to them ; and, again, there is some value to the world both morally and physi- 
 cally. Many of the so-called ' advances ' in surgery are of little or no 
 value, except as advertising dodges for ambitious young surgeons." 
 
 Henry W. Sawtelle, M. D., Surgeon in the U. S. Marine Hos- 
 pital, New Orleans, La. 
 
 Albert H. Blanchard, M. D. (Harvard), Sherborn, Mass.: — 
 
 "It appears to me that the advantages of vivisection, and the joractical 
 good derived therefrom, are not, at present at least, sufficient to justify its 
 practice unless it can be done without pain." 
 
 C. J. Cleborne, M. D., Medical Director, U. S. ISTavy, Naval 
 Hospital, Norfolk, Va. 
 
 Prof. J. Henry Jackson, A. M., M. D., Professor of Physiology, 
 Barre, Vermont. 
 
 Frank W. Ring, M. D,, A.M., Surgeon to Manhattan Eye and 
 Ear Hospital, New York City. 
 
 N. A. MossMAN, M. D., New York City : — 
 
 " Without supervision, indifferent experimenters might say that they had 
 complied with all the requirements if they gave a few inhalations of chloro- 
 form, then experimented any length of time without continuing its use." 
 
 John Wesley Daily, A. B., M. D., Boston, Mass. : — 
 
 "Man, by reason of superior intelligence, does not own the earth. He 
 is simply one of the creatures growing out of the conditions that give and 
 govern life throughout the limitless universe of Nature, and in all the count- 
 less worlds. Who knows or can even guess the ultimate unfoldments of 
 time ? In the mind of the crowning intelligence that may finally dominate 
 this earth, man may appear as the man-monkey of the Miocene epoch or the 
 
26 
 
 VIVISECTION ALLOWABLE IF WITHOUT PAIN. 
 
 anthropoid ape of the present. Until it is shown that vivisection actually 
 benefits the animals, as a class, upon which it is practised, man's right to 
 use his scalpel upon live, quivering animal structures is very questionable." 
 
 Edward W. Aveky, M. D., Brooklyn, E". Y. : — 
 
 " Even though anaesthetics are used, I do not consider vivisection justifi- 
 able to demonstrate well-known facts or to gratify cnriosity." 
 
 Edgar S. Dodge, M. D., Natick, Mass. : — 
 
 " Vivisection should be under the limitation and control of United States 
 law, and severe penalties should be applied to all violations." 
 
 Clarkson C Schuyler, M. D., Plattsburg, N. Y. : — 
 
 "If a law allowing vivisection and without pain cannot be enforced, then 
 I am for the absolute prohibition of vivisection." 
 
 W. E. Sparrow, M. D., Mattapoisett, Mass. 
 H. H. Brighaiii, M. D., I-'itchburg, Mass. 
 James Utley, M. D., Newton, Mass. 
 E. A. Chase, M. D., Brockton, Mass. 
 P. H. Keefe, M. D., Worcester, Mass. 
 M. L. Lindsay, M. D., Athol, Mass. 
 
 E. A. Deane, M. D., Montague, IMass. 
 Geo. E. Foster, M. D., Springfield. Mass. 
 John B. Chagnon, M. D., Fall River, Mass. 
 C. B. Bridgham, M. D., Cohasset, Mass. 
 John Blackmer, M. D., Springfield, Mass. 
 
 (Makes slight changes in phraseology, but 
 not to impair the general principle.) 
 Henry J. Gushing, M. D., Merrimac, Mass. 
 Luther M. Lee, M. D., Dorchester, Mass. 
 S. J. Grover, M. D., Brockton, Mass. 
 N. R. Perkins, M. D., Dorchester, Mass. 
 Wm. 0. Hunt, M. D., Newtonville, Mass. 
 George W. Doane, M. D., Hyannis, Mass. 
 M. S. Soule, JL D., Winthrop, Mass. 
 S. W. Clark, M. D., Lynn, Mass. 
 
 F. A. Shurtleff, M. D., Somerset, Mass. 
 Charles W. Stiles, jM. D., Newburyport, Mass. 
 J. E. Blaisdell, M. D., A. M., Chelsea, Mass. 
 Francis Coliamore, M. D., North Pembroke. 
 W. G. Eaton, M. D., Lowell, IMass. 
 
 C. R. Starkweather, M. D., West Cumming- 
 ton, Mass. 
 
 S. T. Davis. IM. D., Orleans, Mass. 
 
 J. R. Greenleaf, M. D., Gardner, Mass. 
 
 Wm. T. Souther, M. D., Worcester, Mass. : 
 " During my course at Harvard (in 187.3), 
 experiments upon animals were per- 
 formed painlessly ; ether was used 
 invariabh", even upon frogs and 
 tadpoles." 
 
 L. W. Curtis, M. D., Globe Village, Mass. 
 
 P. L. Sanborn, M. D.. MarWehead, Mass. 
 
 Edgar C. Collins, M. D., Springfield. Mass. 
 
 Daniel March, Jr., M. D., Winchester, Mass. 
 
 T. F. Goodwin, M. D., Mt. Vernon, N. Y. 
 
 J. E. Hamill, M. D., Phoenix, N. Y. 
 
 D. D. Wickham, M. D., Port Jervis, N. Y. 
 
 S. W. Reed, M. D., Morgantown, N. Y. 
 
 George N. Wilson, M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 
 Charles M. Fuller, M. D., Boston, j\rass, 
 
 Edwin H. Bi'igliam, M. D.. Boston, Mass. 
 
 Isaac Farrar, M. D., Boston, IMass. 
 
 J. Foster Bush, M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 
 A. W. K. Newton, M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 
 James Louis Beyea, M. D., New York City. 
 
 Egbert H. Grandin, M. D., New York City : 
 "Vivisection is allowable if without pain, 
 except when, in the judgment of recog- 
 nized experts, new facts of value to the 
 human race cannot be certified if the 
 animal be anaesthetized." 
 
 W. H. Vermilye, M. D., New York City. 
 
 Dayton W. Searle, A. M., M. D., New York 
 City. 
 
 G. S. Cook, M. D., New York City. 
 
 John Pitkin, M. D., Buffalo, N. Y. 
 
 Alcinous B. Jamison, M. D., New York City. 
 
 John I. Brinkerhoff, M. D., Auburn, N. Y. " 
 
 Alexander Berghaus, M. D., New York City. 
 
 Richard E. Kunze, M. D., New York City. 
 
 Frederic J. Kneuper, M. D., New York City. 
 
 John G. Linsley, M. D., New York City : — 
 " I accept No. III. in regard to use of 
 drugs, and No. II. in regard to vivi- 
 section per se. Nos. II. and III. com- 
 bined will express my views upon the 
 subject." 
 
 James G. Birch, M. D. (Harvard Medical 
 School), Newburgh, N. Y. 
 
 Edward G- Tripp, M. D., New York City. 
 
 Geo! W. Brush, M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 
 A. Henry Hart, M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 
VIVISECTION ALLOWABLE IF WITHOUT PAIX. 
 
 27 
 
 William O'Meagher, M. D., New York City. 
 M. K. Yedder, M. D. College Physician & 
 Surgeon, New York Cit}'. 
 (Dr. Vedder underscores last three lines.) 
 A. D. Rockwell, A. M., M. D., New York 
 City: — 
 "Vivisection is allowable if without pain 
 and restricted by utility." 
 Edward F. Quinlan, M. D., New York City: 
 '•I am radically opposed to vivisection 
 without any restrictions, as also am I 
 opposed to the absolute prohibition of 
 vivisection. . . . Vivisection allowable 
 without pain meets with my hearty in- 
 dorsement." 
 Martin Burke, M. D. (Bellevue), New York 
 City: — 
 "This is a very proper statement." 
 Charles Carter Cranmer, M. D., Surgeon, 
 
 New York City. 
 A. D. Tewksbury, JI. D., Elmira, N. Y. 
 M. A. Southworth, M. D., Little Falls, N. Y. 
 W. F. Sanford, M. D., Webster, ]Mass. 
 E. F. Spaulding, M. D., Boston. 
 Geo. J. Moser, ]\I. D., New York City: — 
 " The animal experimented on should not 
 come out of the influence of anaesthetics 
 after an important fact has been demon- 
 strated, or a major operation has been 
 performed." 
 
 D. N. Barker, M. D., Broadalbin, Fulton Co., 
 
 N. Y.: — 
 "I indorse as above if regulated by definite 
 
 State laws, permitted only to competent 
 
 persons," etc. 
 J. P. Wheeler, M. D., Brighton, N. Y. 
 O. A. .Jakway, M. D., Brockport, N. Y. 
 A. B. Sloan, M. D., Belloner, N. Y. 
 M. Talbot, M. D., Niagara Falls, N. Y. 
 J. H. Westcott, M. D , Norwich, N. Y. 
 J. C. Benham, M. D., Hudson, N. Y. 
 H. P. Vosburgh, M. D.. Halsey Valley, N. Y. 
 John H. Fitch, M. D., New Scotland, N. Y. 
 .^. O. Gleason, M. D., Elmira, N. Y. 
 John H. Mitchell, M. D., Newburgh, N. Y. 
 H. C. Johnston, "SI. D., New Brighton, N. Y. 
 J. H. Copp, M. D., Natural Bridge, N. Y. 
 
 E. H. Barnes, M. D., Marathon, N. Y. 
 Walter E. Lauderdale, M. D., Geneseo, N. Y. 
 E. U. Coonley, M. D., Port Richmond, N. Y. 
 Jas. C. Spiegel, M. D., Middletown, N. Y. 
 C. B. Warner, M. D., Port Henry, N. Y. 
 
 H. C. Miller, M. D., Greenbush,"N. Y. : — 
 " In my opinion vivisection should be per- 
 formed on criminals condemned to 
 death." 
 
 Samuel W. Abbott, M. D., Wakefield, Mass.: 
 "Vivisection is allowable, if without un- 
 necessary or excessive pain." 
 
 John E. Losee, M. D., Red Hook, N. Y. 
 
 R.C.VanWyck,M.D., Hopewell Junction.N.Y. 
 
 E. M. Draper, M. D., Ilion, N. Y. 
 
 O. A. Bruce, JL D., Hyudsville, N. Y. 
 
 Alonson Bishop, M. D., Ithaca, N. Y. 
 
 C. Spencer Kinney, M. D., Middletown, N. Y. 
 
 Lucien L. Brainard, M. D., Little Falls, N. Y. 
 
 Wm. M. James, M. D., Whitesboro, N. Y. 
 
 Otto Risch, M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 
 David A. Gordon, M. D. Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 
 John C. MacEvitt, M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 
 O. C. Stout, M. D., Syracuse, N. Y. 
 
 Frank H. Green, M. D., Homer, N. Y. 
 
 J. Russell Taber, M, D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 
 Z. Brooks Wales, M. D., Elmira, N. Y. 
 
 Theron A. Wales, M. D., Elmira, N. Y. 
 
 A. M. Larkin, M. D., Norwood, N. Y. 
 
 John W. Benton, M. D., Ogdensburg, N. Y. 
 
 John M. Julian, M. D., Pleasant Valley, N. Y. 
 
 Lyman Barton, M. D., A.M., Willsboro,N.y. 
 
 Cassius J. Logans, M.D., Warrensburgh,N.Y. 
 
 T. James Owens, M. D., Steuben, N. Y. 
 
 G. H. Lathrop, M.D., Livingston Manor, N. Y. 
 
 T. J. Green, M. D., Mexico, N. Y. 
 
 J. H. Helmer, M. D., Lockport, N. Y. 
 
 J. H. Trumbull, M. D., Hornellsville, N. Y. 
 
 Ira D. Hopkins, A. M., M. D., Utica, N. Y. 
 
 William L. Harding, M. D., New York City. 
 
 Lyman A. Clark, M. D., Cambridge, N. Y. 
 
 J. R. Brown, M. D., Seward, N. Y. 
 
 Nelson W. Bates, M.D., Central Square, N.Y. 
 
 A. Von Der Luhe, M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 
 Edward B. Foote, M. D., New York City. 
 
 Lyman Watkins, M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 
 H. C. Sutton, M. D.,Rome, N.V. 
 
 L. M. Johnson, M. D., Greene, N. Y. : — 
 "Except in some very rare cases, when the 
 use of chloroform or ether is inadmissi- 
 ble, or rather utterly impossible, with a 
 due regard to necessary scientific ex- 
 perimentation." 
 
 Henry B. Burton, M. D., Troy, N. Y. 
 
 George M. Lamb, M. D., Hoosick Falls, N. Y. 
 
 Samuel Blume, M. D., Riverhead, L. I., N. Y. 
 
 Elliott C. Howe, M. D., Lansingburgh, N. Y. 
 
 Henry W. Caldwell, M. D., Pulaski, N.Y. : 
 
 " I fully concur with and indorse the abovi 
 
 as the only right we have for official 
 
 demonstrations upon the living." 
 
 Jos. Alfred Deane, M. D.. Catskill, N. Y. 
 A. J. Alleman, M. D., MacDougall, N. Y. 
 Benj. C. Wakely, M. D., Hornellsville, N. Y. 
 J. Denniston, M. D., Ovid, N. Y. 
 
28 
 
 VIVISECTION ALLOWABLE IF WITHOUT PAIN. 
 
 Keuben S.Myers, M.D., Clarence Center, N.Y. 
 
 S. W. Wetmore, M. D., Buffalo, N. Y. 
 
 Mary B. Wetmore, Buffalo, N. Y. 
 
 Jerome Angel, M. D., Cortland, N. Y. 
 
 R. E. Belding, M. D., Troy, N. Y. 
 
 Mary E. Bond, M. D., New York City. 
 
 H. L. Chase, M. D., Palmyra, N. Y. 
 
 C. S. Boyce, M. D., Salamanca, N. Y. 
 
 Henr}-- A; Jewett, M. D., Northborough, Mass. 
 
 Wm. Hagadorn, M. D., Gilboa, N. Y. 
 
 Acbilles Rose, M. D., New York Citj'. 
 
 A. P. Parries, M. D., Florida, N. Y. 
 
 C. O. Johnson, M. D., Gowanda, N. Y. 
 
 F. W. Advance, M. D., Elmira, N. Y. 
 
 J. A. Westlake, M. D., Elmira, N. Y. 
 
 Silas Pinckney Holbrook, M. D., East Doug- 
 lass, Mass. 
 
 David F. Atwater, M. D., Springfield, Mass. 
 
 Edward H. Ellis, M. D., Marlboro, Mass. 
 
 Hiram B. Cross, M. D., Jamaica Plain, Mass. 
 
 H. A. Fiske, M. D., East Longmeadow, 
 Mass. 
 
 M. Bonner Flinn, M. D., Worcester, Mass. 
 
 H. Warren White, M. D., Roxbury, Mass. 
 (Physician to the St. Elizabeth and Bap- 
 tist Hospitals). 
 
 Charles P. Morrill, M. D., North Andover 
 Depot, Mass. 
 
 F. W. Wliittemore, M. D., Cambridge, Mass. 
 
 Francis L. Babcock, M. D , Dedham, Mass. 
 
 Edward P. Scales, M. D., Newton, Mass. 
 
 Charles L. French, M. D., Clinton, Mass. 
 
 E. D. Hutchinson, -M. D., Westfield, Mass. 
 
 James R. Deane, M. D., Newton Higliland.-, 
 Mass. 
 
 Alvin M. Cashing, M. D., Springfield, Mass. 
 
 E. W. Higher, M. D., Northampton, Mass. 
 
 Asa V. Snow, M. D., Brookfield, Mass. 
 
 Albert B. Robinson, M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 
 J. F. Shuitleff, M. D., South Middleborough, 
 Mass. 
 
 John Langdon Sullivan, M. D., Maiden, Mass. 
 
 E. P. Hussey, M. D., Buffalo, N. Y. 
 
 Clayton L. Hill, M. D., Buffalo, N. Y. 
 
 J. S. Helbert, M. I)., Buffalo, N. Y, 
 
 H. A. Morse, M. D., Batavia, N. Y. 
 
 Mr. William Dean Howells, Author, New York City. 
 
 Mr. Edward Bellamy, Author, Chicopee Falls, Mass. 
 
 Mr. Brander Matthews, Author, New York City. 
 
 Prof. Albert Bushnell Hart, Harvard College, Cambridge, Mass. 
 
 Prof. John Bascom, Williamstown, Mass. 
 
 Prof. AtBioN W. Small, Ph.D., Professor of Sociology, Univer- 
 sity of Chicago. 
 
 Prof. John Grier Hibben, Professor of Logic, Princeton Univer- 
 sity, Princeton, N. J. 
 
 Prof. Charles W, Shields, Princeton, N. J. : — 
 
 " Vivisection is allowable if without pain, in the judgment of humane and 
 scientific experts." 
 
 Prof. W. F. Hewett, Cornell University, Ithaca, N. Y. 
 Prof. Galusha Anderson, D. D., LL.D., Professor of Practical 
 Theology, University of Chicago. 
 
 Prof. H. S. White, Dean of Cornell University, Ithaca, N. Y. : 
 
 " Vivisection is allowable if for true scientific purposes, in order ultimately 
 to ameliorate the condition of mankind, as well as of animal life in general." 
 
 Prof. S. Burnham, Dean of the Hamilton Theological Seminary, 
 Hamilton, Madison Co., N. Y. 
 
 Prof. Henry K. Edson, Grinnell, Iowa. 
 
 Prof. W. G. TousEY, A. M., B. D., Tufts College, Mass. 
 
 Prof. M. L. D'OoGE, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich. 
 
VIVISECTION ALLOWABLE IF WITHOUT PAIN. 29 
 
 • 
 Prof. Gabriel Campbell, M. P., S. T. D., Dartmouth College, 
 Hauover, N. H. 
 
 Prof. George E. Woodberry, Columbia College, ISTew York City. 
 (Erases all but last paragraph, and inserts " Public Officers " in last line 
 but one.) 
 
 Prof. James H. Hyslop, Columbia College, New York City. 
 Prof. Charles C. Rounds, Ph.D., Principal of the State Normal 
 School, Plymouth, IST. H. : — 
 
 " Vivisection is allowable if without pain, for research, — not for illustra- 
 tion and demonstration." 
 
 President E. Benjamin Andrews, D. D., LL.D., Brown Univer- 
 sity, Providence, P. I. : — 
 
 " I would add that, if there are results of very great importance obtain- 
 able by vivisection without anagsthesia or with limited anaesthesia, I would 
 permit vivisection without or with limited anaesthesia subject to the condi- 
 tions recited above in the last ^^aragraph of printed matter." 
 
 President Andrew V. Raymond, LL.D., Union College, Sche- 
 nectady, X. Y. 
 
 President James R. Day, D. D., S. T. D,, Chancellor of the Syra- 
 cuse University, Syracuse, N. Y. 
 
 President George A. Gates, D. D., Iowa College, Grinnell, Iowa: 
 " This, on the whole, seems nearest my own view. There are perhaps 
 some cases where pain may be an essential factor of the investigation. This 
 ought to be of the shortest possible duration consistently with the scientific 
 purpose. More depends at last upon the right kind of heart in the bosom of 
 the operator." 
 
 President Chas. F. Meserol, A. M'., Shaw University, Raleigh, JST. C. 
 
 President M. Wahlstrom, A.M., Ph.D., Gustavus Adolphus Col- 
 lege, St. Peter, Minn. 
 
 President Carl A. Swensson, Bethany College, Lindsborg, 
 Kansas ; — 
 
 " Vivisection is allowable if without pain, and for object stated in 
 No. II L" 
 
 President Fenton Gall, Hillsboro College, Hillsboro, Ohio. 
 President Wm. H. Purxell, A. M., LL.D., New Windsor College, 
 New Windsor, ^laryland : — 
 
 " The fourth statement is horrible ; the third may be tolerated ; the 
 second expresses my opinion." 
 
 Mr. Robert S. Davis, F.litor of " The Call," 
 
 Philadelphia, Pa. 
 Mrs. Frank Leslie, Author and Publisher, 
 
 New York City. 
 Prof. James Swan Barrell, A. M., Master of 
 
 Harvard School, Cambridgeport, Mass. 
 
 Dr. H. Lansing, Editor, New York City: — 
 "Vivisection allowable if without pain, and 
 restricted by utility." 
 Mr. Henry B. Blackwell, Editor of " Woman's 
 Journal," Boston, Mass. 
 
30 
 
 VIVISECTION ALLOWABLE IF WITHOUT PAIN". 
 
 Et. Rev. John James Stewart, Bishop of Worcester, Worcester- 
 shire, England : — 
 
 "I think II. and III. may be combined. Vivisection I think is allowable 
 when restricted by utility, and when it is performed without pain to the 
 animal operated upon." 
 
 Rt, Eev. Thomas A. Jagger, Bishop of Southern Ohio. 
 Et. Eev. George F. Seymour, Bishop of Springfield, 111. 
 Et. Eev. Daniel S. Tuttle, Bishop of Missouri, St. Louis, Mo-. 
 Et. Eev. C.K. Nelson, Bishop of Georgia, Atlanta, Ga. 
 Et. Eev. 0. W. Whitaker, Bishop of Pennsylvania. 
 Et. Eev. Francis K. Brooks, Bishop of Oklahoma and Indian 
 Territories, Guthrie, Oklahoma. 
 
 Eev. C. W. Leffingwell, A.M., D. D., Editor of ''The Living 
 Church," Chicago, 111. : — 
 
 " To be allowed only for instruction of students in medicine and surgery." 
 Eev. George J. Magill, D. D., Newport, E. I. : — • 
 
 "The experiments should be such as to inflict no pain during tlie opera- 
 tion and to leave the subject in a painless condition afterwards." 
 
 Eev. William P. Shrom, D. D., Pittsburg, Pa. : — 
 
 "I should much prefer to sign No. I., but am not quite sure but it 
 would hinder to some extent the furthering of scientific investigation. My 
 •whole heart is on that side of the question, and my head more than half there 
 too ; yet for the present I give tlie investigator the benefit of my doubt." 
 
 Eev. Herman C. Eiggs, D. D., Eochester, N. Y. : — 
 
 "No. II. comes nearest of your four forms to being my answer. But I 
 favor this limited permission only with the condition that experinientation 
 shall be conducted by none but expert investigators, and by them only for 
 neic or unsettled experiments. A result once definitely and clearly reached 
 by authoritative investigation, vivisection with reference to that should im- 
 mediately cease to be permissible." 
 
 Eev. Egbert Aikman, D. D., Madison, N. J. ; — 
 
 " It seems to me that the above statement meets the demands of an en- 
 lightened and humane public opinion. The pain of instantaneously inflicted 
 death is not greater than the ordinary pains of natural death, and death 
 under the influence of chloroform is without pain. There seem to have been 
 discoveries made of the causation of disease and of remedial agencies in the 
 relief and cure of diseases which make painless vivisection allowable ; and 
 especially if the places where it is performed are open to inspection as 
 above." 
 
 Rev. John Hall, D. D., New York City. 
 Rev. Charles H. Eaton. D. D., New York City. 
 Rev. Reuen Thomas. D D., Brookline, Mass. 
 Rev. H. Martyn Hart, D. D. (Dean of St. 
 John's Cathedral), Denver, Colo. 
 
 Rev. Granville "W. Nims, Walton, N. Y. 
 Rev. Joseph Anderson, D. D., Waterbury, 
 
 Conn. 
 Rev, William MacConnock. M. A., St. Ann's 
 
 Church, Brooklyn, N. t. 
 
VIVISECTION ALLOWABLE IF WITHOUT PAIX. 
 
 31 
 
 Rev. Joseph Henry Allen, D. D., Cambridge, 
 Mass. : — 
 " The whole thing is so repulsive and ab- 
 horrent to me that I cannot imagine 
 instances in which my personal conduct 
 would not be controlled by your first 
 condition of 'absolute prohibition.' 
 But something must be conceded by a 
 layman to experts; and I think the 
 conditions expressed above (No. II.) is 
 ■ all that can be attempted wisely by 
 general law. And I do not feel justified 
 in saying that a scrupulously medical 
 specialist in an extreme case may not 
 conform with No. III.; not, however, 
 the ordinary lecturer or practitioner." 
 Rev.. Henry E. Niles, D. D., Yorl<, Pa. 
 Rev. W. C. Gannett, Rochester, N. Y. : — 
 "Vivisection allowable if without pain, but 
 only for purposes of investigation (never 
 of illustration), and only to persons duly 
 licensed under stringent conditions of 
 competency, place, time, and inspec- 
 tion ; all other vivisections to be a mis- 
 demeanor punishable by imprisonment 
 (not fine)." 
 Mrs. Isabel C. Barrows, M. D., Editor, Boston, 
 
 Mass. 
 Rev. Samuel J. Barrows, Editor of the 
 
 " Christian Register," Boston, Mass. 
 Rev. A. J. Lyman, D. D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 Rev. Wm. a'. Vibbert, S. T. D., New Y'ork 
 City : — 
 " Vivisection allowable if without pain and 
 restricted by utility." 
 Rev. W. W. Moorhead, D.D., Greensburg, Pa. 
 Rev. El ward C. Hood, Wrentham, Mass. 
 Rev. Charles H. Oliphant, Methuen, Mass. 
 Rev. W. M. Backus, Alton, 111. : — 
 
 "I am not well enough versed upon this 
 subject to express an opinion intelli- 
 gently, but the above 9een\s to me to be 
 the rational and humane conclusion." 
 Rev. J. W. Bailey, Lockport, N. Y. 
 Rev. Thomas P. Byrnes, Humboldt, Iowa. 
 Rev. S. A. Hoyt, D. D., Watertown, N. Y. 
 Rev. Gen. W. Wood, Mt. Morris, N. Y. 
 Rev. JIary H. Graves, Boston, ^fass. 
 Rev. John H. Munro, D. D., Philadelphia, Pa. 
 Rev. W. S. Fulton, D. D., Lexington, Ky. 
 ' Rev, A. B. Carver, Yonkers, N. Y. 
 Rev. Geo. H. Ide, Milwaukee, Wis. 
 R«v. Alvin F. Bailey, Barre, Mass. : — 
 " Vivisection allowable if without pain, and 
 restricted by utility." 
 Rev. Theodore S.-Rumnev, Germantown, Pa. 
 
 Rev. John Townsend, M.A., Middletown, Ct. 
 
 Rev. Richmond Shreve, D. D., Albany, N.Y.: 
 " Vivisectiony«s/i^erf by utility and pain- 
 lessness ; to be restricted by law to 
 certain definite objects, and surrounded 
 by every possible safeguard against 
 license or abuse." 
 
 Rev. D. 0. Mears, Cleveland, Oiiio. 
 
 Rev. Lemuel B. Bissell, Monroe, Jlich. 
 
 Rev. J. A. Rondthaler, Indianapolis, Ind. : 
 " If the first paragraph under 'Absolute 
 Prohibition of Vivisection ' could be 
 proved to be absolutely true, I would 
 sign that number. However, there are 
 as many high in knowledge and author- 
 ity tiiat express opposite views to those 
 cited there that I sign number II. in the 
 eainest hope that its provisions may 
 obtain." 
 
 Rev. Edward H. Krans, New York City. 
 
 Rev. John T. Huntington, Hartford, Conn. 
 
 Rev. John N. Lewis, Jr., B. A., Honesdale, Pa. 
 
 Rev. Wm. C. Richardson, Newburyport, Mass. 
 
 Rev. Wm. P. Orrick, D. D., Reading, Pa. 
 
 Rev. Henry M. Ladd, D. D., Cleveland, Ohio. 
 
 Rev. J. Sanders Reed, Watertown, N. Y. 
 
 Rev. Charles James Wood, S. T. B., York, Pa. 
 
 Rev. Marcus A. Tolman, Mauch Chunk, Pa. 
 
 Rev. J. Frederick Sexton, M. A., Cheshire, Ct. 
 
 Rev. Dr. Henry McCrea, New Haven, Conn. : 
 "In absence of accurate knowledge of the 
 facts, I endorse the 1st or ■2d proposi- 
 tions in your circular, strongly inclining 
 to the 1st." 
 
 Rev. Frederick B. Allen, Boston, Mass. 
 
 Rev. James H. ]McIlvaine, New York City. 
 
 Rev. H- W. Nelson, Jr., D. D., Geneva, N. Y. 
 
 Rev. C. S. Brooks, Fitchburg, Mass. 
 
 Rev. A. Z. Conrad, Worcester, Mass. 
 
 Rev. George H. Reed, Haverhill, Mass. 
 
 Rev. Charles E. Jefferson, B. A., S. T. B., 
 Chelsea, Mass. 
 
 Rev. Louis Gregory, Lincoln, Neb. 
 
 Rev. Smith Baker, D. D., East Boston, Mass. 
 
 Rev. S. S. Mitchell, Buffalo, N. Y. : — 
 
 "Am in doubt between this and absolute 
 prohibition." 
 
 Rev. A. W. Ringland, D. D., Toledo, Ohio. 
 Rev. C. H. Tyndall, M. A., New York City. 
 Rev. James Henry Wiggin, Boston, Mass. 
 Rev. Thomas M. Miles, Bristol, Conn. 
 Rev. Dr. Geo. K. Ward, Dansville, N. Y. 
 Rev. James Dingwell. Rockville, Conn. 
 Rev. Nelson Millard, D. D., Rochester, N. Y. 
 Rev. Alexander McKenzie, Cambridge, Mass. 
 Rev. J. Nelson Trask, New Salem, Mass. 
 
32 
 
 VIVISECTION ALLOWABLE IF WITHOUT PAIN, 
 
 Kev. Charles 01mstead,Cambridgeport, Mass.: 
 " Should prefer these points softened a little 
 for cases of rare eraerge7icy/' 
 
 Kev. T. S. Hamlin, Washington, D. C. : — 
 "I do not accept this statement unquali- 
 fiedi}-. Pain in animals may be jus- 
 tifiable if certain to give knowledge 
 that will relieve human pain. I would, 
 therefore, partially approve HI. But the 
 peril is that science will disregard pain 
 in its zeal of discoveiy. I favor very 
 rigid laws of restriction, and every effort 
 to create a humane public sentiment." 
 
 Rev. Wm. G. Poor, B. A.,B. D., Keene,N. H.: 
 
 " Possibly I would sign the first on a careful 
 
 examination of the merits of the case." 
 
 Rev. Wm. H. Hudnut, Port Jervis, N. Y. 
 Rev. Daniel R. Foster, A. M., Trenton, N. J. : 
 , " I am exceedingly grateful for the privilege 
 of contributing in the very slightest 
 towards restricting this evil. Praj' do 
 not become discouraged. It is deeply 
 rooted, and has concealed environ- 
 ments." 
 
 Rev. Charles Martin Niles, Rutland, Vt. 
 
 Rev. Wm. V. W. Davis, Pittsfield, Mass. 
 
 Rev. G. S. Richardson, Little Falls, N. Y. 
 
 Rev. Heber H. Beadle, Bridgeton, N. J. 
 
 Rev. 0. W. Folsom, Bath, Me. 
 
 Rev. Dan. F. Bradley, Grand Rapids, Mich. 
 
 Rev. Chas. H. Bixby, Cliicago, 111. 
 
 Rev. Herbert G. Coddiiigton, Syracuse, N. Y. 
 
 Rev. J. M. McGrath, Morgan Park, 111. 
 
 Rev. C. H. Hibbard, D. D., Burlington, N.J. 
 
 Rev. Edwin S. Gould, Athol Centre. 
 
 Rev. Wm. Heakes, Wellsbnro, Pa. 
 
 Rev. H. P. Dewey, Concord, N. H. 
 
 Rev. Frederick J. Bassett, Providence, R. I. 
 
 Rev. David S. Schaff, Jacksonville, 111. 
 
 (Dr. Schaff makes numerous slight altera- 
 tions, but accepts the general statement 
 as a whole.) 
 
 Rev. D. M. Fisk, Toledo, Ohio. 
 
 Rev. Wallace Radcliffe, D. D., Detroit, Mich. 
 
 Rev. George C. Foley, Williamsport, Pa. 
 
 Rev. Francis Edward Smiley, Denver, Colo. 
 
 Rev. James B. Nisbett, Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 
 Rev. T. Eaton Clapp, Manchester, N. H. 
 
 Rev. James R. Winchester, D. D., B. Ph., 
 
 Nashville, Tenn. : — 
 " My convictions almost take in the first (L) 
 form. Man has dominion over brute 
 creation, and sometimes benefits may 
 come through a special experiment (of 
 a painless character). Humane experts 
 must decide that painless case." 
 
 Rev. Henry M. Tenney, Oberlin, Ohio: — 
 "Exceptions to this rule should be limited 
 by definite law to experiments essential 
 to the interests of humanity, and which 
 are impossible with the use of chloro- 
 form or ether, if such there are." 
 
 Rev. Wm. H.Scudder, Norwich, N. Y. : — 
 " Vivisection allowable if without pain, and 
 restricted by utility." 
 
 Rev. James Wm. Ashton, D. D.,01ean, N.Y. : 
 " The above expresses most nearly my view, 
 but should modify it in exceptional 
 cases by the following one ; namely, 
 Vivisection restricted by utility, for the 
 same reason that we observe the prin- 
 ciple of utility in dealing with similar 
 exigencies in the human subject." 
 
 Rev. Willis E. Parsons, Danville, 111. 
 
 Rev. Wm. D. Williams, San Francisco, Cal. 
 
 Rev. J. L. Countermine, Marinette, Wis. 
 
 Rev. David D. Marsh, Unionville, Conn. 
 
 Rev. C. E. Dickinson, Marietta, Ohio : — 
 " I can easily see that vivisection is valuable 
 to science; at the same time, God has 
 given nerves to animals as he has to us. 
 They suffer pain as we do, and I con- 
 ceive we have no right to inflict upon 
 them needless pain. Since we can use 
 amesthetics with animals as well as with 
 man, it is our duty to do so. I would 
 therefore most heartily vote for j'our. 
 second proposition." 
 
 Rev. Marc St. Darling, Sioux City, Iov\:a. 
 
 Rev. 0. S. Bunting, Trenton, N. J. 
 
 Rev. S. P. Dunlap, M. A., Springfield, Ohio. 
 
 Rev. W. F. Markwick, Ansonia, Conn. 
 
 Rev. Perry Wayland Sinks, Painesville, Ohii; : 
 " I find myself in substantial accord wiili 
 the second view, with a leaning toward 
 the first." 
 
 Rev. F. p. Davenport, Memphis, Tenn. 
 
 President Orello Cone, D. D., Buchtel College, Akron, Ohio. 
 President S. G. Gilbreath, B. Sc, Hiwassee College, Tenn. 
 President Jeeie. Moore, D. D., Tusculum, Tenn, : — 
 
 " Vivisection allowable under law." 
 President Samuel Plantz, Lawrence University, Appleton, Wis. 
 
VIVISECTION ALLOWABLE IF WITHOUT PAIN. 33 
 
 President J. D. Shtrey, A. M., North Carolina College, Mt. Plea- 
 sant, K. C. : — 
 
 " In the main I agree with the above. It expresses my sentiments more 
 nearly than either of the others." 
 
 President Lemuel H. Mublin-, A. B., Baker University, Kansas. 
 President D. R. Dungan, A. M., LL.D., Cotner University, 
 Lincoln, Neb. 
 
 President John H. Finley, Ph.D., Knox College, 111. 
 James W. Mokey, A. M., Lakewood Heights School, N. J. 
 F. B.Knapp, S. B., Powder Point School, Duxbury, Mass., Presi- 
 dent of the Board of Trustees of Partridge Academy : — 
 
 "I do not wholly agree with this statement. I am sure that I am opposed 
 to vivisection under nearly all conditions, and am not sure that I would ap- 
 prove it in any, but might under very exceptional circumstances, and so do 
 not quite agree with No. I." 
 
 Mr. Wm. C. Collar, Teacher, Eoxbnry, Mass. 
 
 President W. G. Compher, A.M., Scio College, Scio, Ohio. 
 
 President W. M. Grier, D. D., Erskine College, Due West, S. C. 
 
 President Holmes Dysinger, D. D., Carthage College, Car- 
 thage, 111. 
 
 President J. W. Bissell, D. D., Upper Iowa University, Fayette, 
 Iowa. 
 
 President J. J. Mills, A. M., LL.D., Earlham College, Richmond, 
 Indiana. 
 
 President James Rogers, S. C. & C, A. M., St. Joseph's College, 
 Cincinnati, Ohio: — 
 
 " Vivisection allowable if without pain, and restricted by utility." 
 
 President B. W. Baker, M. A., Ph.D., Chaddock College, Quincy, 
 Illinois. 
 
 President H. W. McKnight, D. D., LL.D., Pennsylvania College, 
 Gettysburg, Pa. : — 
 
 " I object to the repetition of experiments long since made, simply for the 
 
 entertainment of classes. I would limit it to new experiments, and then only 
 
 with painlessness and for the highest ends." 
 
 Prof. Thomas R. Baker, Rollins College, Winter Park, Fla. 
 Hon. W. H. Upham, Governor of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis. 
 
 Hon. James M. Brown, Attorney-at-Law, 
 President of the Toledo Humane Society, 
 Toledo, Ohio. 
 Hon. .John Day Smith, Minneapolis, Minn. 
 Richard F. Reed, Natchez, Miss. : — 
 
 " Our dominion over animals carries with 
 it a great trust. We are to protect 
 
 them in their rights, chief among which 
 is freedom from torture. I am opposed 
 to vivisection for demonstration; and 
 unless the benefit to mankind from it is 
 very decided, I am opposed to it abso- 
 lutely." 
 Mr. Chas. R. Eraser, Canton, Ohio. 
 
34 
 
 VIVISECTION RESTRICTED BY UTILITY. 
 
 Mrs. Lily Lord Tifft, Buffalo, N. Y. 
 
 Hon. W. A. Calderhead, M. C, Attorney-at- 
 Law, Marysville, Kansas : — 
 " Nothing but the highest moral purpose can 
 give science her authority ; and when 
 the sense of moral responsibility leaves 
 the operator, every experiment in sci- 
 ence becomes dangerous to man. The 
 third statement modified by this II. 
 expresses my views." 
 
 Hon. James H. Kyle, U. S. Senator, Aberdeen, 
 
 So. Dakota; — 
 
 " This most nearly accords with my views. 
 
 In the interests of medical science I 
 
 think experiments should be made; but 
 
 I abhor torture in every form." 
 
 Hon. Robert Neill, M. C, Batesville, Ark. 
 
 Hon. Richard Bartholdt, M. C, St. Louis, Mo. 
 
 Hon. W. VV. Bowers, M. C, San Diego, Cal. 
 
 Hon. J. S. Willis, M. C, Milford, Del. 
 
 Hon. Benson Wood, .M. C, Effingham, 111. ' 
 
 Hon. C. J. Boatner, M C, Monroe, La.: — 
 " Barbarism can hardly be conducive to in- 
 vestigation or the promotion of science, 
 and if it is, the price paid would be too 
 dear. Unless the animal is protected 
 in some way from the torture necessarily 
 inflicted by the operation, it should not 
 be permitted." 
 
 Hon. C. D. Clark, Evanston, Mo. 
 
 Mr. Philip G. Low, 307 Lenox Ave., New 
 
 York City. 
 Hon. Jas. H. Huling.M. C, CharlePton,W. Va. 
 Hon. Walter Evans, M C, Louisville, Ky.; 
 "Vivisection allowable if without pain, at 
 
 the same time likely to lead to useful 
 
 results." 
 
 Hon. S. W. Kerr, M. C , Mansfield, Ohio. 
 Sir Eizak Pitman, Bath, England. 
 
 Hon. Robert J. Tracewell, M. C, A. M., 
 Corydon, Md. : — 
 "I would qualify above as follows: (1) If 
 there was a doubt as to whether aiiv 
 particular operation was painful, I 
 would resolve the doubt in favor of 
 the animal, and prohibit this operation 
 by law. (2) The operation should not 
 be performed on the higher order of 
 animals, such as monkey, horse, or 
 dog." 
 
 Mr. A. J. Rowland, Sec. Am. Bap. Pub. Soc, 
 
 1420 Chestnut St., Phila., Pa. 
 Mr. David H. Moore, Editor of the " Western 
 
 Christian Advocate," Cincinnati, Ohio. 
 Mr. Charles W. Lincoln, Editor of "The 
 
 Press," Philadelphia, Pa. 
 Rev. Thomas Diumm, M. D., 22 State Street, 
 
 New York City. 
 Mr. John W. Freese, A.M., Teacher, Cam- 
 bridge, Mass. 
 Mr. Frederick S. Cutter, Teacher, Cambridge, 
 
 Mass. 
 Miss Caroline T. Haven, Prin. Kin. Dep't., 
 
 Working-Man's School, New York 'City. 
 Mr. Charles W. Birtwell, Gen. Sec. Boston 
 Children's Aid Soc, Boston, Mass. : — 
 "I should disapprove of vivisection of any 
 kind for purposes of demonstration, and 
 should approve only of painless vivisec- 
 tion by original investigators under 
 State appointment and regulation. I 
 should favor absolute prohibition of 
 vivisection if I did not give the benefit 
 of the doubttotheclaim that vivisection 
 may beneiit mankind." 
 
 Mrs. Charles G. Ames, Boston, Mass. 
 
 Rev. Charles E. Woodcock, Christ Church, 
 
 Ansonia, Conn. 
 Rev. W. Tatlock, D. D., Stamford, Conn. 
 
 III. VIVISECTION RESTRICTED BY UTILITY. 
 
 Vivisection is a practice of such variety and complexity, that, 
 like warfare between nations, one can neither condemn it nor approve 
 it unless some careful distinctions be first laid down. We hold that 
 only a great and definite advantage to the interests of humanity can 
 justify its use, and that in each case Science must prove that advan- 
 tage and that necessity; its hands should not be left free to inflict 
 torture without restriction or restraint. Even the zeal of a Magendie 
 
YIVISECTION RESTRICTED BY UTILITY. 35 
 
 or a Mantegazza cannot condone their cruelty, nor can Science make 
 the search for a fact obliterate the distinctions between right and 
 wrong. Within certain limitations we regard Vivisection to be so 
 justifie'd by utility as to be legitimate, expedient, and. right. Beyond 
 these boundaries it is cruel , monstrous, and wrong. 
 
 Experimentation upon living animals we consider justifiable when 
 employed to determine the action of new remedies ; for tests of sus- 
 pected poisons ; for the study of new methods of surgical procedure, 
 or in the search for the causation of disease, — in short, for any 
 object where the probable benefi to mankind is very great, and the 
 suffering inflicted not greater than that of instantaneous death, nor 
 more than the pain and distress of the human ailments to alleviate 
 which the experiment is made. On the other hand, we regard as 
 cruel and wrong the infliction of torment upon animals in the search 
 for physiological facts which have no conceivable relation to the 
 treatment of human diseases; or experiments that seem to be made 
 only for the purpose of gratifying a heartless curiosity, — such, for 
 example, as those described, in the work of Professor Mantegazza, 
 entitled "The Effect of Pain upon Respiration." 
 
 We consider as ivholly unjustifiable the common practice in the 
 United States^ of subjecting animals to torture in the laboratory or 
 classroom, merely for the purpose of demonstrating well-known and 
 accepted facts. We hold that the infliction of torment upon a living 
 animal under such circumstances is not justified by necessity, nor 
 is it a fitting exhibition for the contemplation of youth. And since 
 in England, Scotland, and Ireland such experiments as these are 
 regarded as degrading in tendency, and are therefore forbidden by 
 law, we think no harm will come to Science if they shall also be 
 forbidden in every American State. 
 
 We believe, therefore, that the common interests of Humanity 
 and Science demand that Vivisection, like the study of human 
 anatomy in the dissecting-room, should be brought under the direct 
 supervision and control of the State. The practice, whether in 
 public or in private, should be restricted by law to certain definite- 
 objects, and surrounded by every possible safeguard against license 
 or abuse. • 
 
 [Several shades of opinion are represented by the sisnatures to this state- 
 ment. As a rule, disagreement is indicated by various erasures of words, 
 sentences, or paragraphs, made in order to shape the phraseology of the state- 
 ment into accord with individual views. The signers of this statement may be 
 classified as follows : — 
 
 1. Those who have signed the statement without changing it in any way. 
 Many of these have even underscored certain sentences, particularly in the last 
 paragraph. 
 
36 VIVISECTION EESTRICTED BY UTILITY. 
 
 2. Those who agree in the condemnation of torture as a method of teachinc 
 well-known physiological facts, and in general approval of State supervision 
 and control of Vivisection ; but who, for various reasons, prefer to soften and 
 change the phraseology of the statement in less important particulars. Their 
 eliminations sometimes refer to single words or short phrases, such as " mon- 
 strous," " wholly, unjustifiable," " very great," *' the common practice," " must 
 prove necessity," "a great advantage," etc.; or they may affect entire sen- 
 tences, such as the attempt to define the limits of permissible pain-infliction, 
 the allusion to Magendie and Mantagazza, and particularly the reference to the 
 examj^le of Great Britain. (This last clause is to man}- especially obnoxious.) 
 
 3. Those who denounce or condemn the use of torture as a method of teach- 
 ing well-known facts, but who cannot approve of any appeal to legislation for 
 its prohibition. As a rule, those who take this position would place no impedi- 
 ments in the way of any original research in any direction. Disapproval of 
 minor points in the phraseology of the statement is quite common. 
 
 4. Those who believe that Vivisection should be under more or less super- 
 vision by the State, but who apparently would not condemn even painful 
 experiments for teaching purposes, if in the judgment of the teacher pain can 
 be thus made " useful." 
 
 o. Those whose erasures, changes, and eliminations affect absolutely and 
 vitallj' every important part of the entire statement. They do not approve of 
 supervision nor restraint, nor do they condemn any form of experimentation for 
 any object. It is not easy to perceive wherein their views differ from those who 
 favor " Vivisection without Restrictions " of any kin(f. It would, of 
 course, be a mistake to count these names with those of the majority who favor 
 the leading jirinciples of the statement and restricted vivisection.]- 
 
 1. Signed as -written, -without Chang;e. 
 
 Herbert Spencer, Author, London, 
 
 Sir Edwin Arnold, Author, and Editor of the " London Tele- 
 graph," London : — 
 
 " It is with this that 1 agree, detesting and dreading unlicensed vivisection. 
 But I love and honour Science too much to deny her any right, exercised 
 with true scientific spirit ; that is, with reverence, mercy, and love to all 
 livino- things. I would hardly allow even an angel to vivisect without 
 anfesthetics.*' 
 
 The fourth statement. Sir Edwin Arnold characterizes as " the language 
 of scientific devils." 
 
 Egbert Braithwatte, M. D., "F. L. S., London : — 
 
 "... After facts have been sufficiently established, it is not necessary 
 to repeat experiments for individual satisfaction, still less for demonstration 
 to students ; the facts should be accepted from the teacher equally with other 
 facts which cannot be demonstrated." 
 
 President David H. Cochran, Ph.D., LL.D., Polytechnic Insti- 
 tute, Brooklyn, N. Y. • 
 
VIVISECTION EESTEICTED BY UTILITY. 37 
 
 President Martin Kellogg, LL.D., University of California, 
 Berkeley, Cal. 
 
 President Henry Wade Eogers, LL.D., Northwestern University, 
 Evanston, 111. 
 
 President Elmer H. Capen, D. D., Tufts College, Mass. 
 
 President Charles Kendall Adams, LL.D., University of Wis- 
 consin, Madison, Wis. 
 
 E. H. Thurston, LL.D., Director of Sibley College, Cornell Uni- 
 versity, Ithaca, ]Sr. Y. 
 
 C. C. Everett, D. D., Dean of Harvard Divinity School, Cambridge, 
 Mass. 
 
 George Hodges, D. D., Dean of Episcopal Theological School, 
 Cambridge, Mass. 
 
 James 0. Murray, Dean of Princeton University, Princeton, N. J. 
 
 Cyrus Northrop, LL.D., President University of Minnesota, 
 Minneapolis, Minn. : — 
 
 " Vivisection is practised more than is necessary ; it ought undoubtedly 
 
 to be restrained. Doubtless it has its uses in teacliing, but its value in inves- 
 tigation has been overrated." 
 
 Prof.' William James, M. D., Author ; Professor of Psychology, 
 Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass. : — 
 
 "If public opinion could constitute the check, I should prefer that; but 
 that would necessarily be ineffectual. I think there will be cjreat difficulty 
 in defining by law what is legitimate, or in having wliatever law were made, 
 discriminatingly administered. In principle, however, I have not a moment's 
 hesitation in standing up for the vivisector being outwardly responsible for 
 his acts." 
 
 Kt. Rev. Henry A. Neely, Bishop of Maine : — 
 
 " The above statement most nearly expresses my views. If the opinions 
 of Sir Charles Bell, Dr. Lawson Tait, and Dr. Bell-Taylor (quoted in the first 
 statement) were generally endorsed by pathologists of the highest class, it 
 would follow, me j'udice, that vivisection can in no case be justified." 
 
 Et. Eev. Joseph Blount Cheshire, Jr., Bishop of South Carolina : 
 " While as a matter of sentiment I am strongly inclined to say that vivi 
 section should be absolutely prohibited, yet I am not able to justify that 
 position fully to my mind and conscience. The statement of ' vivisection 
 restricted by utility,' seems to me to be in accordance with relations which 
 God has established and declared between man and the lower orders of 
 living creatures. Vivisection should be allowed only in case of necessity or 
 • of great utility, and then under strict regulations." 
 
 Et. Eev. Mahlon N. Gilbert, Asst. Bishop of Minnesota. 
 
 Et. Rev. Charles Todd Quintard, D. D., Bishop of Tennessee. 
 
 Et. Eev. Anson E. Graves, LL.D., Bishop of The Platte. 
 
38 VIVISECTION KESTEICTED BY UTILITY. 
 
 Et. Rev. Alexander Burgess, Bishop of Quincy. 
 
 Rt. Rev. CoRTLANDT WHITEHEAD, Bishop of Pittsburg. 
 
 Rt. Rev. George W. Peterkin, LL.D., Bishop of West Virginia. 
 
 Rt. Rev. P. D. Huntington, Bishop of Central New York. 
 
 Rt. Rev. Lemuel H. Wells, Bishop of Spokane. 
 
 Rt. Rev, Nelson Somerville Rulison, Assistant Bishop of 
 Central Pennsylvania. 
 
 Prof. T. M. Balliet, M. D., Professor of Therapeutics, Dartmouth 
 Medical College, Philadelphia, Pa. 
 
 Prof. T. Gaillard Thomas, M.D., College of Physicians and Sur- 
 geons, Consulting Surgeon of the State Women's Hospital, N. Y. 
 
 Simon Baruch, M. D., Physician to the Manhattan General Hospi- 
 tal, N. Y., and late Physician and Surgeon to the N. Y. Juv. Asylum. 
 (Would jDermit vivisection for demonstration, under anaesthesia.) 
 
 Prof. Geo. Montgomery Tuttle, M. D., Professor of Gynaecology 
 in the College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York. 
 
 Prof. Andrev/ H. Smith, M. D., Post-Graduate School, Attending 
 Physician of the Presbyterian Hosi^ital, New York. 
 
 Prof. Alonzo Bootiiby, M. D., Associate Professor of Surgery, 
 Boston, School of Medicine : — 
 
 " It does not seem clear upon what grounds j'ou are making the inquiry ; 
 but as the matter is a very important one, and as there has been such an un- 
 necessary and absurd use of animals to amuse students and idlers, I send you 
 my protest, with the hope that your object is to lessen the evil." 
 
 Daniel Cook, M. D., New York City : — 
 
 " In my experience, certain vivisections are performed mostly for the 
 most unworthy object of making the lectures sensational above those at other 
 colleges, — exactly as our theatres and newspapers vie with one another in 
 furnishing blood-curdling plays, or sensational news." 
 
 John Allan Wyeth, M. D., President of the Faculty of the New 
 York Polyclinic Medical School and Hospital, New York. 
 
 Albert McScully, M. D., M. Ch., L. M., Queen's University, for- 
 merly Assistant Demonstrator of Anatomy in Queen's College, Ireland, 
 New York City : — 
 
 " A person actively engaged in vivisection is inclined to subscribe to the 
 fourth statement. The whole mind is absorbed in the subject ; and clear 
 unbiassed reasoning is then out of the question. I felt thus myself, at one 
 time, when full of my subject, as well as full of youthful ardor. After mature 
 deliberation, I freely and unconditionally subscribe to this statement." , 
 
 G. B. Hope, M. D., New York City : — 
 
 " From what I have been witness to in several steps of my student career, 
 I am heartily in sympathy with your investigation. I believe in the severest 
 control governing vivisection. Every class-room exhibition jiarticularly 
 
VIVISECTION KESTEICTED BY UTILITY. 39 
 
 should be prohibited as useless and demoralizing. I would have every ex- 
 perimenter file an application, giving the nature and intention of the oper- 
 ation, and subsequently report the number, size, and quality of animals 
 employed, with the results obtained. Such a course would check needless 
 and vicious operations." 
 
 (Dr. Hope graduated twenty years ago from a medical college notorious 
 for its extreme vivisections.) 
 
 Archibald T. Baxxing, M,D., Pres. City Medical Association, 
 Mt. Vernon, N. Y. : — 
 
 " I well remember when a student the feelings of horror that arose on 
 seeing certain experiments. . . . The first experiment was altogether an out- 
 rage ; the second, though of some utility, had already been sufficiently 
 demonstrated, and a mere statement from the professor would have accom- 
 plished as much instruction as ocular evidence. The impression thus made 
 on the unformed minds of students is bad, and might have a tendency to 
 develop some morbid psychopathic action such as ' Sadism.' I have such 
 cases in view." 
 
 John L. Schoolcraft, M. D., Schenectady^ IST. Y. : — 
 
 " The continual practice of vivisection by assistant lecturers and others 
 to show what has been thoroughly proven by men of reputation, should be 
 absolutely prohibited." 
 
 William J. Burr, M. D., late Acting Staff-Surgeon, TJ. S. A., 
 Newark Valley, N. Y. : — 
 
 , " I have seen most kindly conducted experiments, and also others most 
 abhorrent. In my opinion, vivisection should be under restrictions, and 
 conducted without pain." 
 
 S. P. MooRE, M. D., Munnville, N. Y. : — 
 
 " I am aware that we are apt to forget what is right in efforts after fame. 
 As I grow older, certain scenes before a class of young men seem to me of 
 very doubtful propriety. Medical students are apt to be rough enough with- 
 out such sights." 
 
 Jonathan Kneeland, M.D., S. Onondaga, !N". Y. : — 
 
 " If we know less of the mysteries of existence by refraining from tor- 
 menting our pets, we shall at any rate increase the total joy of animal life." 
 
 William H. Munn, M. D., New York City : — 
 
 " iSTo undergraduate to attempt it ; only by a professor, and with the 
 least pain." 
 
 John Parmenter,'M. D., Prof, of Anatomy and Clinical Surgery, 
 University of Buffalo, Surgeon to the Erie Co. Fitch and Children's 
 Hospitals, Buffalo, N. Y. 
 
 Archibald M. Campbell, M. D., Consulting Physician in tlie Home 
 for Incurables, N. Y. City, Member of the Academy of Medicine, 
 Physician to the N. Y. Infant Asylum, etc., Mt. Vernon, N. Y. 
 
40 VIVISECTION EESTRICTED BY UTILITY. 
 
 Herman Mynter, M. D., Professor of Surgery, Niagara University, 
 Buffalo, N. Y. 
 
 James E. Kelly, M. D., F. E. C. S., Consulting Surgeon, French 
 Hospital, New York City. 
 
 0. B. Douglass, M. D., Surgeon to the Manhattan Eye and Ear 
 Hospital, late President of the Medical Society of the county of New 
 York, etc. 
 
 Charles S. Mack, M. D., Professor of Materia Medica and Ther- 
 apeutics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich. : — 
 
 « 
 "... Regard as useless much that some regard as useful." 
 
 George M. Gould, M. D., Editor of the " Medical News," Phila- 
 delphia, Pa. : — 
 
 " Whenever possible, under anaesthesia." 
 
 (Dr. Gould's views regarding vivisection have been well expressed in his 
 recent work on biological investigation, " The Meaning and Method of Life," 
 from which we quote and italicize the following passage : " If a A'ery limited 
 use of vivisection experiment is necessary for scientific and medical progress, 
 it 7nust be regulated by law, carried out with jealous guarding against excess 
 and against suffering, and the maimed animals painlessly killed when the 
 experiment is complete, ilie practice carried on by conceited jackanapes to 
 prove over and over again already ascertained results, to minister to egotism, for 
 didactic purposes, — these are not necessary, and must be forbidden.") 
 
 Isaac Sharpless, LL.D., President of Haverford College, Pa. 
 
 A. H. Fetterolf, Ph.D., LL.D., President of Girard College, 
 Philadelphia, Pa. 
 
 W. F. McDowell, D. D., Chancellor of the University of Denver, 
 Colorado. 
 
 Wm. M. Blackburn", D. D., LL.D., President of Pierre University, 
 Pierre, S. D. 
 
 W. H. Scott, LL.D., President of the Ohio State University, 
 Columbus, Ohio. 
 
 Francis Wayland, LL.D., Dean of Yale Law School, New 
 Haven, Ct. 
 
 Franklin W. Hooper, Director of the Institute of Arts and Sci- 
 ences, Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 
 Edwin J. Houston, Electrical Expert, Philadelphia, Pa. 
 
 Edward S. Holden, LL.D., Astronomer, Director of Lick Obser- 
 vatory, Mt. Hamilton, California. 
 
 Prof. Henry Fairfield Osborn, Da Costa Professor of Biology, 
 Columbia Coll., N. Y. 
 
 Prof. James L. Robertson, M. D., Professor of Theory and Practice, 
 Am. Veterinary College, N. Y. City. 
 
 Eev. Samuel A. Barnett, Warden of Toynbee Hall, London, 
 England. 
 
VIVISECTION EESTKICTED BY UTILITY.' 41 
 
 Hamo Thoknyckoft, K. A., Sculptor, Loudon, England. 
 Dr. Ha VELOCK Ellis, Editor of the <' Contemporary Science Series," 
 Cornwall, England. 
 
 Edward Bkeck, Ph.D., Journalist, Berlin: — 
 
 " A limitation to one or two laboratories in each State might be wise." 
 
 Francis F. Browne, Editor of '<The Dial," Chicago, 111.: — 
 
 " Believing that all the relations of men to animals, like the relations of 
 men to each other, should be subject to State regulation, I of course hold 
 that vivisection should be under such control, and very stringently." 
 
 Prof. Wm. a. Packard, Princeton University, New Jersey. 
 Prof. GrEORGE M. Harper, Ph.D., Princeton University, N. J. 
 Prof. Benj. Ide Wheeler, Cornell University, Ithaca, N. Y. 
 Prof.*EDWARD Hitchcock, Jr., Cornell University, Ithaca, N. Y. 
 Prof. Charles E. Bennett, Cornell University, Ithaca, IS". Y. 
 Prof. GeorCxE p. Bristol, Cornell University, Ithaca, N. Y. : — 
 " In hearty sympathy with this statement." 
 
 Prof. Egbert Baird, Northwestern University, 111. 
 
 Prof. Charles F. Bradley, D. D., Garrett Biblical Institution, 
 Evanston, 111. 
 
 Prof. John M. Shaller, M. D., Professor of Physiology, College 
 of Medicine and Surgery, Cincinnati, Ohio. 
 
 Prof. C. F. Brackett, M. D., LL.D., President of the Board of 
 Health for the State of New Jersey, Professor of Physics, Prince- 
 ton, N. J. 
 
 Prof. Wm. Francis Magie, Ph.D. (Berlin), Professor of Physics, 
 Princeton College, N. J. 
 
 Prof. Francis H. Herrick, Biologist, Adelbert College, Cleve- 
 land, 0. 
 
 . Prof. Ogden N. Kood, Professor of Physics, Columbia College, 
 New York. 
 
 Prof. Charles B. At well, Ph.M., Professor of Botany, N. W. 
 University, Evanston, 111. 
 
 Prof. A. E. Turner, A. M., Professor Natural Sciences, Lincoln 
 University, 111. 
 
 Prof. Henry . B. Cornwall, Professor of Chemistry, Princeton 
 University, N. J. 
 
 Prof. Henry L. Obetz, M. D., Professor of Surgery, University 
 of Michigan, Ann Arbor. 
 
 Prof. Frederick Tracy, Ph.D., Lecturer in Psychology, Univer- 
 sity of Toronto, Canada. 
 
 Prof. John C. Branner, Ph.D., Professor of Geology, Stanford 
 University, Cal. 
 
42 VIVISECTION EESTKICTED BY UTILITY. 
 
 Prof. Albert Nott, M. D., Professor of Physiology and Dean of 
 Tufts College Medical School, Mass. 
 
 Prof. Albert E. Miller, M. D., Professor of Physiology, College 
 of Physicians and Surgeons, Boston, Mass. 
 
 Prof. A. A. D'Ancojsta, M. D., Professor of Physiology, University 
 of California, San Francisco, Cal. 
 
 Pres. Alvah Hovey, D. D., LL D., President of the Newton Theo- 
 logical Institute, Newton, Mass. 
 
 Prof. Arthur S. Hoyt, A. M., D. D., Auburn Theological Semi- 
 nary, Auburn, N. Y. 
 
 Prof. Geo. R. Freeman, A.M., D.B., Meadville Theological 
 School, Penn. 
 
 Prof. Wooster W. Beman. A. M., University of Michigan, Ann 
 Arbor, Mich. * 
 
 Prof. Benj. S. Torrey, University of Chicago, 111. 
 
 Prof. W. H. Mace, A. M., Syracuse University, N. Y. 
 
 Prof. Franklin J. Holzwarth, Ph.D., Syracuse University, N.Y. 
 
 Prof, Eugene Haanel, Ph.D., Professor of Physics, Syracuse 
 University, N. Y. 
 
 Prof. John R. French, Vice-Chaucellor, Syracuse University, N. Y. 
 
 Prof. L. A. Sherman, Lincoln, Neb. 
 
 Prof. A. T. MuRijAY, Stanford University, CaV. 
 
 Prof, Leveritt W. Spring, Williams College, Mass. 
 
 Prof. L. D, WooDBRiDGE, M. D., Williams College, Mass. 
 
 Prof. Anson D. Mor^e, M. A., Amherst College, Mass. 
 
 Prof. Clifford H. Moore, University of Chicago, 111. 
 
 Prof. John B. Clark, Amherst College, Mass. 
 
 Prof. J. B. Parkinson, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis. 
 
 Prof. Walter D. Toy, University of North Carolina. 
 
 Prof. E. W. Hyde, University of Cincinnati, Ohio. 
 
 Prof. Charles E. Fay, A. M., Tufts College, Mass. 
 
 Prof. Edward A. Allen, Lit. Dr., University of Missouri, 
 Columbia. 
 
 Prof. Isaac N. Demmon, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. 
 
 Prof. Charles Davidson, Ph.D., Adelbert College, Cleveland, 0. 
 
 Prof. G. T. Knight, Tufts College, Mass. . 
 
 Prof. Cornelius B. Bradley, A. M., University of California, 
 Berkeley, Cal. : • — 
 
 " I should wish to go a step further, and while not absolutely limiting 
 vivisection to painless forms, as is done in statement II., 1 think that the 
 manner of it should always be determined by considerations, of humanity ; it 
 should be painless in all caaen xcliere painleaanesx will serve the purposes of an 
 otherwise useful and desirable investigation. While I am aware of the diffi- 
 culty of enforcing this distinction, I think it important not to attempt to 
 make pain the sole factor in the decision." 
 
VIVISECTION EESTRICTED BY UTILITY. 
 
 43 
 
 Prof. Arthur T. Hadley, Yale University, New Haven. 
 
 Prof. Frederic D. Allex, Ph.I>., Harvard University, Cambridge. 
 
 Prof. Eugene L. Eichards, Yale University, I^ew Haven. 
 
 Prof. C. G. E.OCKWOOD, Jr., Princeton University, New Jersey. 
 
 Francis A. Schlitz, M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 
 D. H. GooDVi^iLLiE, M.D., New York. 
 
 Thos. Gilfillan, M. D., Northampton, jNIass. 
 
 Prof. James H. Eobixson, Ph.D., Columbia College, New York. 
 
 Prof. J. Macy, a. M., Iowa College, Grinnell, Iowa. 
 
 Allen M. Thomas, M. D., President of the N. Y. Clinical Society, 
 New York City. 
 
 • J. Oscoe Chase, ^I. D., Assistant Surgeon of the N. Y. Opthalmic 
 Hospital, etc., New York City. 
 
 John 'L. Hildreth, M. D., Cambridge, Mass. 
 
 Prof. J. S. Prout, M. D., Long Island College Hospital, Brook- 
 lyn, N. Y. 
 
 I). Branch Clark, M. D., jSTew York City. 
 
 Abel Huntingdon, M. D., New York Cit3^ 
 
 Jaretl G. Baldwin, M. D., New York City: 
 
 • " While I favor vivisection as necessary at 
 times for the progress of science, and 
 would restrict it by utility, I realize the 
 great difficulty there will be in drawing 
 the line between utility and uselessness. 
 . . . Still, I think some restrictions 
 should be made." 
 
 Gen. P. Shirnier, M. D., New York City: 
 " I believe vivisection is also justifiable for 
 the purpose of teaching facts already 
 known, when no pain is caused either as 
 an immediate or subsequent result of 
 the operation." 
 
 Gnrham Bacon, M. D., New York City. 
 
 Richard T. Bang, JI. D., New York City. 
 
 Rt.llin B. Gray, M. D., New York City". 
 
 Frederick Guttman, M. D., New York City. 
 
 Joseph T. O'Connor, M. D., New York City. 
 
 Joseph Eichberg, M. D., New York City. 
 
 H.O. Clauss, M. D., New York City, 
 
 Joseph Braunstein, M. D., Nevv York City. 
 
 K. P. Miller, M. D., New York City. 
 
 Krvin A. Tucker, M. D., New York City. 
 
 T. C. Williams, M. D., New York City. 
 
 Alexander Ha iden, M. D., New York City. 
 
 Andrew F. Currier. M. D., New York City: 
 " This represents, in the main, my views on 
 the subject." 
 
 H. S. Drayton, M. D.. New York City. 
 
 Geo. L Simpson, M. D., New York City. 
 
 Thos. Wilde, M. D., New York City. 
 
 Frank A. McGuire, M. D., New York City. 
 
 G. H. Patchen, M. D., New York City. 
 E. D. Franklin, M. D., New York City. 
 L. L. Bradshaw, M. D., New York City. 
 John G. Perry, M. U., New York City. 
 S. Wesley Smith, M. D., New York City. 
 Ira B. Read, M. D., New York City. 
 Caroline L. Black, M. D., New YoiJc City. 
 R. C. M. Page, M. D. (Prof. New York JPoly- 
 
 elinic), New York City. 
 J. Henry Fruilnight, M. D., New York City. 
 
 C. Ruxton Ellison, M. D., New York City:" 
 "This statement agrees with my ideas 
 
 of the subject precisely. 
 Garret Cosine, M. D., New York Citj-. 
 E. B. Foote, Jr., M. D., New York City. 
 Stephen J. Clark, M. D., New York City. 
 A, H. Heath, M. D., New York City. 
 Sanford J. Murray, M. D., New York City. 
 Harriette C. Keating, M. D., Sc. D., New 
 
 York City. 
 Floyd T. Sheldon, M. D., New York City. 
 Seth D. Close, M. D., New York City. 
 James A. Bennett, M. D., New York City: 
 
 "Allowable for demonstration, if without 
 pain." 
 Octavius A. White, M. D., New York City. 
 
 (Adds last clause of statement IH.) 
 Joseph Kucher, M. D., New York City. 
 Frank W. Merriam, M. D., New York City. 
 H. M. Hitchcock, M. D., New York City. 
 Paul C. Boomer, M. D., Prof, of Anatomy, 
 
 etc., Chicago, 111. 
 John J. Orton, M. D., Lakeville, Conn. 
 J. N. Martin, M. D., Ann Arbor, Mich. 
 
 D. M. Cattell, M. D., Chicago, 111. 
 
44 
 
 VIVISECTION KESTRICTED BY UTILITY. 
 
 Mary H. Thompson; M. D., Chicago, 111. 
 
 Frank Billings, M. D., Chicago, 111. 
 
 J. B. Murdock, M. D., Pittsburgh, Pa. 
 
 Louis T. Riesmeyer, M. D., St. Louis, Mo. 
 
 Francis B. Hill, M. D., Colorado Springs, Col. 
 
 Wni. S. Stewart, M. U., Philadelphia, Pa. 
 (Signs III. also.) 
 
 J. D. Blake, M. D., Baltimore, Md. 
 
 Charles G. Hill, M. D., Baltimore, Md. 
 
 K. \V. Baldwin, M. D., Philadelphia, Pa. 
 
 L. S. Kelsey. M. D., Richmond, Ind. 
 
 D'Estaing Dickerson, M. D., Kansas City, Mo. 
 
 George W. Cale, M. D., St. Louis, Mo, 
 
 Edwin R. Maxson, M. D. 
 
 Aven Nelson, M. D., A. M.. Prof, of Biology 
 in the University of Wyoming, Laramie: 
 " All experiments should be painless, so far 
 as possible; and so far as it will not 
 interfere with success of , the experi- 
 ments." (The last clause nullities the 
 statement.) 
 
 George E. Paul, M. D., Rutland, Vt. 
 
 Ross Wilson, M. D., Chicago, 111. 
 
 H. S. Maxson, M. D., St. Helena, Cal. 
 
 W. H. Maxson, M. D., St. Helena, Cal.: 
 " As far as possible without pain." 
 
 Edmund J. A. Rogers, M. D., Denver, Col. 
 
 James W, Ovenpeck, M. D., Haniillon, Ohio. 
 
 Ida B. Hunt, M. D., Plainfield, N. J. 
 
 L. M. Giifin, M. D., Boulder, Col. 
 
 W. A. Lockwood, M. D., Norwalk, Conn. 
 
 Prof. Walter S. Haines, M. D., Rush Medical 
 
 College, Chicago. 
 Prof. J. M. Withrow, M. D., Cincinnati, Ohio. 
 John H. Thompson, M. D., New York Citj-: 
 
 "Allowable only under an ana?sthetic." 
 Louis N. Schultz, M. D., New York City. 
 Edwin West, M. D., New York City. 
 J. A. Towner, M. D., New York Cif.v. 
 Samuel G. Sewall, M. D., New York City. 
 Hein-y Tuck, M. D., New York City. 
 William F. Wright, M. D., New York City. 
 Thomas F. Smith, M. D., New York City. 
 Frank Livermore, M. D., New York Citj-. 
 H H. Kane, M. D., New York City. 
 0. S. Phelps, M. D., New York City. 
 Homer I. Ostrom, M. D., New York City. 
 P. J. Lynch, M. D., New York City. 
 Granviile C. Brown, M. D., New York City. 
 Adoniram B. Jud?on, M. D., New York City. 
 Reuben B. Burton, M. D., New York City. 
 Egbert Guernsey, M. D., New York City. 
 John E. Comfort, M. D., New York City. 
 Charles Milne, M. D., New York City. 
 John P. Nolan, M. D., New York City. 
 George B. Durrie, M. D., New York City. 
 
 J. E. Janvrin, M. D., New York City. 
 
 Richard E. Kunze, M. D., New York City. 
 
 Ephraim Cutter, M. D., LL.D., New York 
 Cit}'. (See extract from letter, p. 65.) 
 
 George E. Tytler, M, D., New York City: 
 " Persons sentenced to death would serve a 
 most useful purpose if, before execution 
 of the sentence, thej' were subjected to 
 experimentation in testing new reme- 
 dies, etc." 
 
 William L. Flemming, M. D., New York City. 
 Henry E. Crampton, M. D., New York City. 
 W. P. Northrup, M. D., New York City. 
 Willard Parker, M. U., New York City. 
 Prof. William E. Rounds, M. D., Professorin 
 
 the N. Y. Opth. Hospital College, New 
 
 York City. 
 Emily Blackwell, M. D., Dean of the Woman's 
 
 Medical College, New York City. 
 (Agrees with last clause of No. HI.) ^ 
 
 S. A. Russell, M. D., Poughkeepsie, N. Y. : 
 " And as far as possible painless." 
 
 F. A. Winne, M. D., Brockport, N. Y. 
 John B. Ellis, M. D., Little Falls, N. Y. 
 J. H. Trumbull, M. D., HornellsviUe, N. Y. 
 Chas. P. Russell, M. D., u'tica, N. Y. 
 Chas. S. Starr, M. D., Rochester, N. Y. 
 Thos. M. Flandrau, M. D., Rome, N. Y. : 
 " Should be invariably mitigated by anaes- 
 ■ thetics." 
 
 Geo. H. Noble, M. D.,' Cairo, N. Y. 
 
 Geo. M. Palmer, M. D., Warsaw, N. Y. 
 
 Pascal M. Dowd, M. D., Oswego, N. Y. 
 
 Geo. B. Chapman, M. D., Dover Plains, N. Y. 
 
 M. M. Bagg, M. D., Utica, N. Y. 
 
 S. R. Welles, M. D., Waterloo, N. Y. 
 
 C. D. Spencer, M. D., Biughamton, N. Y,: 
 
 " I most heartih' endorse the above senti- 
 ments." 
 A. Miller, M. D., Jordanville, N. Y. 
 Arthur R. Hill, M. D., Farmer, N. Y. 
 E. G. Williams, M. D., Remsen, N. Y. 
 J. W. Douglass, M. D., Boonville, N. Y. 
 H. Sheldon Edson, M. D., Cortland, N. Y. 
 A. T. Van Vranken, M. D., West Troy, N. Y. 
 
 (With anpesthetics, in every instance 
 possible.) 
 Henry F. Kingsley, M. D., Schoharie, N. Y. 
 John C. Fisher, M. D., Warsaw, N. Y. 
 Arthur E. Tuck, M. D., Gloversville, N. Y. 
 E. W. Gallup, M. D., Stamford, N. Y. 
 C. C. Thayer, M. D., Clifton Springs, N. Y. 
 J. E. Smith, M. D., Clyde, N. Y. 
 Wm. H. Hodgman, M. D., Saratoga, N. Y. 
 Paris G. Clark, M. D., Unadilla, N. Y. 
 
VIVISECTION EESTKICTED BY UTILITY. 
 
 •45 
 
 T. D. Spencer, M. D., Rochester, N. Y. 
 
 William E. Hathaway, M. D., Honiellsville, 
 N. Y. 
 
 J. D. Mitchell, M. D., Hornellsville, N. Y. 
 
 Thomas B. Fowler, M. D., Colioctoii, N. Y. 
 
 O. S. Martin, M. D., Salamanca, N. Y. 
 
 K. H. Lougliran, M. D., Kingston, N. Y. 
 
 J. L. Gardiner, M. D., Bridgehamptou, N. Y. 
 
 \V. Scott Hicks, M. D., Bristol, N. Y. 
 
 A. S. Zabriskie, M. D., Suffern, N. Y. 
 
 W. B. Putnam, M. D., Hoosick Falls, N. Y. 
 
 • "hiirles B. Hawley, M. D., Gouverneur, N. Y. 
 
 J. H. Weckel, M.'d., Breakabeen, N. Y. 
 
 Samuel J. Crockett, M.D., Sandy Creek, N. Y. 
 
 T. Millspaugh, M. D., Wallkill," N. Y. 
 
 Ciiarles E. ivitbeck, M. D., Cohoes, N. Y. 
 
 Dr. Edwin R. Maxson, LL.D., Syracuse, N. Y. 
 
 H, A. Place, M. D., Ceres, N. Y. 
 
 James H. Glass, M. D., Surgeou-in-cbarge, 
 UlicaCity Hospital, Ex-President County 
 Medieal Society, etc., Utica, N. Y. : — 
 " The full significance of the last sentence 
 cannot be too strongly emphasized." 
 
 Charles G. Stratton, M. D., Buffalo, N. Y. 
 
 E. Rainier, M. D., 0=ft'ego, N. Y. 
 
 S. Wright Hurd, M. D., Lockport, N. Y. 
 
 John J. Montgomery, M. D., Drvden, N. Y. 
 
 M. B. Folwell, A. M., M. D., Clinical Pro- 
 fessor of Diseases of Children, University 
 of Buffalo, N. Y. ■ 
 
 Gonrge H. Noble, M. D., Cairo, N. Y. 
 
 S. P. Welles, M. D., Waterloo, N. Y. 
 
 Hansom Terrj-, M. D., Ischua, N. Y. 
 
 Guy R. Cook, M. D., Syracuse, N. Y. 
 
 James Allen, M. D., Richford, N. Y. 
 
 Willard R. Fitch, M. D., Knowlesville, N. Y. 
 
 F. A. Button, M. D., Gainesville, N. Y. 
 
 (Adds the last clause of statement III.) 
 
 G. W. Murdock, M. D., Cold Spring, N. Y. 
 Charles Forbs, M. D., Rochester, N. Y. 
 
 G. W. Faller, M. D., Oyster Bay N". Y. 
 R. N. Cooley, M, D., Hannibal Centre, N. Y. 
 J. D. Guy, M. D., Chenango Forks. N. Y. 
 William B. Mann, M. D., Brockport, N. Y. 
 (Erases " in private.") 
 
 R. H. Morey, M. D., Old Chatham. N. Y. 
 W.M. Hilton, M. D., Waverly, N. Y. 
 Fred A. Wright, M. D., Glen Cove, N. Y. 
 R. S. Prentiss, M. D., Long Island Citj-, N.Y. 
 Donald McPherson, M. D., Palmyra, N. Y. 
 A. J. Mixsell, M. D., Mamaroneck, N. Y. 
 J. W. Huntington, M. D., Mexico, N. Y. 
 W. C. Earl, M. D., Buffalo, N. Y. 
 0. J. Hallenbeck, M. D., President Ontario 
 Co. Medical Society, Canandaigua, N. Y. 
 
 M. W. Vandenburg, A. M., M. D., Fort Ed- 
 ward, N. Y. 
 H. T. Dana, M. D., Cortland, N. Y. 
 
 F. A. Strong, M. D., Brewerton, N. Y. 
 Emily H. Wells, M. D., Binghamton, N. Y. 
 John E. Weaver, M. D., Rochester, N. Y. 
 Mrs. M. L. D. Wilson, M. D., Troy, N. Y. 
 A. P. Carsous, M. D., Forestville, N. Y. 
 George V. R. xMerrill, M. D., Elniira, N. Y. 
 M. R. Carson, M. D., Canandaigua, N. Y. 
 
 J. D. Featherstonhaugh, M. D., Cohoes, N. Y. 
 George M. Abbott, M. D., Castleton, N. Y. 
 Wallace Sibley, M. D., Rochester, N. Y. 
 James M. Barrett, M. D., Owego, N. Y. 
 
 G. W. Seymour, M. D., Westfield, N. Y. 
 Theo. Waiser, M. D., New Brighton, N. Y. 
 Smith Ely, M. D., Newburgh, N. Y. 
 Elizabeth R. G. Myer, M. D., Turner, N. Y. 
 Nathan P. Tyler, M. D., New Rochelle, N .Y. 
 Marcenos H. Cole, M. D., Newfane, N. Y. 
 E. B. Tefft, M. D., New Rochelle, N. Y. 
 
 A. M. Comfort, M. D., Syracuse, N. Y. 
 Byron Pierce, M. D., Coopers Plains, N. Y. 
 De Witt C. Jayne, M. D., Florida, N. Y. 
 M. M. Frye, M. D., Auburn, N. Y. 
 
 E. T. Rulison, M. D., Amsterdam, N. Y. 
 J. W. Gee, M. D., Van Etten, N. Y. 
 Carlos T. Miller, M. D., Mount Kisco, N. Y. 
 S. H. Freeman, M. D., Albany, N. Y. 
 Thomas Becket, M. D., Albany, N. Y.: 
 
 " Without pain." 
 Edward Torrey, M. D., .\llegany, N. Y. 
 H. E. Allison, M. D., Medical Supt. Mattea- 
 
 wan State Hospital, Fislikill, N; Y. 
 Henry C. Coon, M. D., Alfred, N. Y. 
 T. KiVkland Perry, M. D., Albany, N. Y. 
 L. E. Rockwell, M. D., Amenia, N. Y. 
 J. R. Fairbanks, M. D., Amsterdam, N. Y. 
 P. J. Keegan, M. D., Albany, N. Y. 
 Frederic C. Curtis, M. D., Albany, N. Y. 
 Richard M. Moore, M. 1)., Rochester, N. Y. 
 William S. Cheesman, M. D., Auburn, N. Y. 
 W. H. Procter, M. D., Binghamton, N. Y. 
 Clayton M. Daniels, M. D., Buffalo, N. Y. 
 Stephen Y. Howell, M. D. (M. R. C. S., Eng- 
 land), Buffalo, N. Y. 
 C. E. Heaton, M. D., Baldwinsville, N. Y. 
 W. J. Nellis, M. D., Albany, N. Y. 
 
 B. 11. Grove, M. D., Buffalo, N. Y. 
 Wm. C. Phelps, M. D., Buffalo, N. Y. . 
 
 F. Findlaj-, M. D., Franklin ville, N. Y." 
 James L. Cooley. M. D., Glen Cove, N. Y. 
 
 C. H. Masten, M. D., Sparkill, N. Y. 
 J. Harris Oxner, M. D., Rome, N. Y. 
 
 D. D. Drake, M. D., Johnstown, N. Y. 
 Thomas B. Nichols, M. D., Plattsburg,N. Y. 
 Charles R. Weed, M. D., Utica, N. Y. 
 
46 
 
 VIVISECTION EESTRICTED BY UTILITY. 
 
 Charles H. Langdon, M. D., Phys. to Hudson 
 River State Hospital, Poughkeepsie, N.Y. 
 M. L. Chambers, M. D., Port Jefferson, N. Y. 
 Alva D. Decker, M. D., Prince Bay, N. Y. 
 Paul D. Carpenter, M. D., Pittsford, N. Y. 
 E. W. Capron, M. D., Lansingburgli, N. Y. 
 Orson G. Dibble, M. D , Ponipey, N. Y. 
 H. C. Hendrick, M. D., McGrawville, N. Y. 
 Arthur B. Kinne, M. D., Syracuse, N. Y. 
 Edwin B irnes, M. D., Pleasant Plains, N. Y. 
 
 E. M. Lyon, M. D., Plattsburg, N. Y. 
 John C. DuBois, M. D., Hudson, N. Y.: — 
 
 "If j)ossible, without causing pain." 
 
 Valentine Browne, M. D., Yonkers, N. Y. 
 
 D. V. Still, M. D., Johnstown, N. Y. 
 T. H. Cox, M. D., Lee Centre, N. Y. 
 Lucius B. Parmele, M. D., Batavia, N. Y. 
 Lyman Barton, M. D., Willsboro, N. Y. 
 e' Howe Davis, M. D., Elmira, N. Y. 
 Cordelia A. Greene, M. D., Castile, N. Y. 
 A. C. Grover, M. D., Port Henry, N. Y. 
 Albert W. Palmer, M. D., Marlborough, N. Y. 
 Randall Williams, M. D., Ex-President of the 
 
 Genesee Co. Med. Society, Le Ro}', N. Y. 
 
 F. G. Osborne, M. D.. South Wales, N. Y. 
 S. Walter Scott, M. D., Troy. N. Y. 
 
 F. P. Beard, M. D., CobleskiU, N. Y. 
 J. K. Stockwell, M. D., Oswego, N. Y. 
 
 E. A. Chapman, M. D., Belleville, N. Y,: 
 " Without pain, when possible." 
 
 J. Erwin Reed, M. D , Carmel, N. Y. 
 Henry Sperbeck, M. D., Charlotteville, N. Y. 
 E. W. Earle, M. D., Rochester, N. Y. 
 
 0. W. Peck, M. D., Oneonta, N. Y. 
 Seldnn J. Mudge, M. D., Clean, N. Y. 
 J. G. Russell, M. D., Salem, N. Y. 
 Osman F. Kinlock, M. D., Troy. N. Y. 
 
 J. Seward White, M. D., Glen Falls, N. Y. 
 Charles G. Bacon, M. D., Fulton, N. Y. 
 John J. Walsh, M. D., Buffalo. N. Y. 
 D. A. Barnum, M. D., Cassville, N. Y. 
 
 1. G. Johnson, M. D., Greenfield Centre, N. Y. 
 ^ J V. D. Coon, M. D., Clean, N. Y. 
 
 J. H. Wiggins, M. D., Jamestown, N. Y. 
 Newton F. Curtis, M. D., White Plains, N. Y. 
 Fremont W. Scott, M. D., Medina, N. Y. 
 Jerome H. Coe, M. D., Syracuse, N. Y. 
 L. T. White, M. D., Homer, N. Y. 
 Geo. Huntington, M. D., La Grangville, N. Y. 
 H. P. Whitford, M. D., Bridgewater, N, Y. 
 M. H. Bronson, M. D., Lowville, N. Y. 
 H. D. Weyburn, M. D., Geneva, N. Y. 
 S. J. Pearsall. M. D., Saratoga Springs, N. Y. 
 John C. Sill, M. D., Argyle, N. Y. 
 Jacob L. Williams, M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 (Signs both IL and III.) 
 
 Eli H. Long, M. D., Professor of Materia 
 Medica in Buffalo College of Pharmacy, 
 Buffalo, N. Y. ' . 
 
 Francis Brick, M. D., Vice-Pres. Mass. Surg, 
 and Gynise. Soc, Worcester, Mass. 
 
 O. J. Brown, M. D., North Adams, Mass. 
 
 F. W. Brigham, M. D., Shrewsbury, Mass. 
 John D. Young, M. D., Winthrop, Mass. 
 
 G. E. Fuller, M. D., Monson, Mass. 
 
 J. Anson Bushee, M. D., Ea^t Boston, Mass. 
 Locero J. Gibbs, M. D., Chicopee, Mass. 
 W. P. M. Ames, M. D., Springfield, Mass. 
 Stephen W. Driver, M. D., Cambridge, Mass. 
 James Peirce, M. D., Methuen, Mass. 
 John Dixwell, M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 
 (Questions the existence of any exten- 
 sive abuse of vivisection in the United 
 States.) 
 
 J. A. Houston, M. D., Northampton, Mass. 
 Hosea M. Quinby, M. D., Worcester, Mass. 
 Frank A. Hubbard, M. D., Taunton, Mass.: 
 " Painlessly, if possible." 
 
 Julius Garst, M. D., Worcester, Mass. 
 L. J. Putnam, M. D., No. Adams, Mass. 
 Charles W^ Haddock, M. D., Beverly, Mass. 
 C. A. Wheeler, M. D., Leominster, Mass. 
 Morgan L. Woodruff, M. D., Pittsfield, Mass. 
 Franz H. Krebs, M. D., Boston, Mass.: — 
 
 "The practice should only be allowed to 
 Zoologists of the first rank." 
 Fred. W. Chapin, M. D., Springfield, Mass. 
 0. W. Phelps, M. D., Warren, Mass. 
 T. Haven Bearing, M. D., Braintree, Mass. 
 Alfred A. Mackeen. M. D., Whitman, Mass. 
 George C. Osgood, M. D., Lowell, Mass. 
 Edward H. Adams, M. D., Plymouth, Mass.: 
 
 "Vivisection should also be restricted by 
 regard to the liighest dictates of 
 humanity." 
 John A. Gordon, M. D., Quincy, Mass. 
 F. A. Rogers, M. D., Chatham, Mass. 
 S. W. Bowen, M. D., Fall River, Mass. 
 Geo. F. Simpson, M. D., North Adams, Mass. 
 
 (Adds the last three lines of Statement 
 IIL) 
 
 Benj. M. Burrell,. M. D., Boston, Mass.: — 
 "An anaesthetic should always be used, if 
 possible." 
 E. A. Daniels, M.D. (Harvard), Boston, Mass. 
 S. T. Hyde, M. D., Dorchester, Mass. 
 James L. Harriman, M. D., Hudson, Mass. 
 Thomas Waterman, M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 Clarence L. Hower, M. D., Hanover, Mass. 
 Frederick F. Doggett, M. D. (Harvard), 
 
 Boston, Mass. 
 Dwight E. Cone, M. D., Fall River, Mass. 
 
VIVISECTION EESTEICTED BY UTILITY. 
 
 47 
 
 Emma L. Call, M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 Riifus K. Noyes, M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 F. Gordon Morrill, M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 Edward C. Briggs, M. D. (Assistant Professor 
 
 of Materia Medica, Harvard University), 
 
 Boston, Mass. 
 
 E. S. Bolaiid, M. D., So. Boston, Mass. 
 Henry N. Jones, M. D., Kingston, Mass. 
 W. li. Sylvester, M. D., Natick, Mass. 
 Henry M. Chase, M. D., Lawrence, Mass. 
 Helen A. Goodspeed, jM. D., Leicester, Mass. 
 .John H. Gilbert, M. D., Quincy, Mass. 
 .James A. Dow, M. D., Cambridge, Muss. 
 
 A. S. Osborne, M. D., Medford, Mass. 
 George E. Percy, M. D., Sale)n, Mass. 
 Wni. K. Knowles, M. D.. Everett, Mass.: 
 " This statement corresponds with my views. 
 
 Vivisection should certainly be carefully 
 
 restricted." 
 C. N. Chamberlain, M. D., Andover, Mass.: 
 " AnoBsthesia should be employed in every 
 
 case where its use would not defeat the 
 
 object of inquiry." 
 S. L. Eaton, M. D., Newton Highlands, Mass. 
 J. ,T. B. Vermyne, M. D., New Bedford, Mass. 
 Charles Jordan, M. D., Wakefield, Mass. 
 Lincoln K. Stone, M. D., Newton, Mass. 
 J. Winthrop Spooner, M. D., Hingham, Mass. 
 John M. French, M. D., Milford, Mass. 
 Rollin C. Ward, M. D., Northfield, Mass. 
 Willard S. Everett, M. D., Hyde Park, Mass. 
 Otis H. Johnson, M. D., Haverhill, Mass. 
 H. A. Smith, M. D., Bondsville, Mass. 
 Edwin B, Harvey, M. D., Westborough, Mass. 
 J. H. Robbins, M. D., Hingham, Mass. 
 (Signs also No. IIL) 
 
 F. H. Davenport, M. D., Instructor in Gynaa- 
 
 cology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, 
 
 jSIass. 
 A. A. Arthur, M. D., Marshfield, Mass. 
 J. A. Follett, M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 John A. Lamson, M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 James Dunlap, M. D., Northampton, Mass. 
 Julia A. Marshall, M. D., Haverhill, Mass. 
 
 E. E. Spencer, M. D., Cambridgeport, Mass. 
 ("has. W. Stevens, M. D., Charlestown, Mass. 
 Nathan French, M. D., Maiden, Mass. 
 Leslie A. Phillips, M. D., Berkeley St., Bos- 
 ton, Mass. 
 
 S. F. Haskins, M. U., Orange, Mass.: — 
 " Would have an anesthetic used whenever 
 practical." 
 Luther .G. Chandlf^r, M. D., Townsend, Mass. 
 J. K. Warren, M. D., Worcester, Mass. 
 
 F. J. Canedy, M. D., Shelburne Falls, Mass. 
 E. Proctor Peirce, M. D,, Springfield, Mass. 
 H. A. Deane, M. D., Plasthampton, Mass. 
 
 C. M. Barton, M. D., Hatfield, Mass. 
 
 (Adds, " and permitted only to competent 
 and trustworthy persons.") 
 
 Edwin A. Colb}', M. D., Gardner, Mass. 
 
 W. H. Hildreth, M. D., Newton Upper Falls, 
 
 Mass. 
 M. V. Pierce, M. D., Milton, Mass. 
 C. A. Allen, M. D., Holyoke, Mass.: — 
 
 " And without pain." 
 John B. Learned, M. D., Florence, Mass.: 
 
 " And without pain." 
 C. C. Messer, M. D., Turners Falls, Mass. 
 C. G. Trow, M. D., Sunderland, Mat-s. 
 C. Blodgett, M. D., Holyoke, Mass.: — 
 
 " And without pain." 
 
 C. M. Wilson, M. D., Shelburne Falls, Mass. 
 
 John P. Brown, M. D., Taunton, Mass. 
 
 Porter Hall, M. D., Leominster, Mftss. 
 
 John C. Irish, M. D., Lowell, Mass. 
 
 Thomas Conant, M. D., Gloucester, Mass. 
 
 Mose.s W. Kidder, M. D., Lincoln, Mass. 
 
 John W. Crawford, M. D., Lawrence, Mass.: 
 "I would restrict vivisection to medical 
 schools, and to such professors of an- 
 atomy and physiology (or medical stu- 
 dents under their guidance) as may re- 
 ceive license under State supervision." 
 
 P. Wadsworth, M. D., Maiden, Mass. : — 
 " Painless, so far as possible." 
 
 Seraph Frissell, M. D., Springfield, Mass. 
 Henry J. Kenj'on. M. D., Worcester, Mass.: 
 " To all the above I most heartily and 
 earnestly subscribe." 
 
 Wm. A. McDonald, M. D., Lynn, Ma.ss. 
 
 Daniel C. Rose, M. D., Stoughton, Mass. 
 
 J. F. Adams, IM. D.. Worcester, Mass. 
 
 A. Carter Webber, M. D., Cambridge, Mass. 
 
 S. A. Sylvester, M. D., Newton Centre, Mass. 
 
 Orin Warren, M. D., West Newbury, Mass. 
 
 W. H. Tobey, M. D.. Boston, Mass. 
 
 John H. Kennealy, M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 (Agrees with last clause of III.) 
 
 Henry G. Preston, M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 
 J. Lester Krep, M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y'. 
 
 Francis H. "Miller, M. D., Physician to St. 
 Malachy's Home, Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 
 John H. Trent, M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 
 John H. French, M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 
 Arthur Beach, M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 
 Frank Bond, M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 
 J. Freeman Atwood, M. D., Hmoklyn, N. Y. 
 
 Benjnmin Ayres, M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 
 A. Nelson Bell, M. D., Editor of " The Sani- 
 tarian," B;-nok1yn,N.Y. 
 
 Wesley Sherman, M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 
48 
 
 VIVISECTION RESTRICTED BY UTILITY. 
 
 J..L. Cavdozo, M. D., D. D., Brooklyn, N. Y. : 
 " As far as possible, without causing pain." 
 
 George Nichols, M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 George W. Gushing, M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 Jesse B. Lung, M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 Henry F. Riseh, M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 L. h" Miller, M. D.,A. M., Brooklyn, N. Y.: 
 '• Most nearly represents my views." 
 
 S. E. Stiles, M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 GlentworthR. Butler, A. M., M, D., Physician 
 to the M. K. Hospital, Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 (Favors vivisection restricted only by 
 " possible, probable, or certain utility.") 
 
 Eliza W. Mosher, M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 John F. Davis, M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 J. B. Mattison, M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 W. Armstrong Fries, M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 T. C. Giroux, M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 J. G. Atkinson, M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 N. A. Robbins, M. D., Surgeon of- the Brook- 
 lyn Fire Department, Brooklyn, N. Y. : 
 " V'ivisection only allowable if without 
 pain." 
 
 Benjamin Edson, M. D., Brooklvn, N. Y.: 
 " With proper use of anaesthetics." 
 
 G. Leroy Menzie, M. D., Oneida, N. Y. 
 HowellWhite, M. D., Fishkill, N. Y.: — 
 " And without pain." 
 
 W. P. Clothier, M. D., Buffalo, N. Y. 
 Geo. F. Perry, M. D., Woodbourne, N. Y. 
 Mary Armstrong, M. D., Jamestown, N. Y. 
 W. S. Webster, M. D., Liberty, N. Y. 
 R. J. Carroll, M. D., Red Hook, N. Y. 
 Edw. E. Brown, M. D., Glenvilie, N. Y. 
 C. R. Rogers, M. D., Newark Valley, N. Y. 
 James W. Putnam, M. D., Lyons, N. Y. 
 Amelia E. DeNott, M. D., Syractise, N. Y. 
 W. F. Nutten, M. D., Newark, N. Y. 
 Clifford Hewitt, M. D., Hoosick Falls. N. Y. 
 W. E. Whitford., M. D.. Oxbow, N. Y. 
 M. M. Fenner, M. D., Fredonia, N. Y. : — 
 " Use of anfBsthetics, when practicable, 
 should be enjoined.' 
 
 Porter Farley, M. D., Rochester, N. Y. 
 B. B. Bnntecou, M. D., Troy, N. Y. 
 E. V. Dencll, M. D., Saratoga Springs, N. Y. 
 James H. Jackson, M. D., Dansville, N. Y. 
 K. J. Jackson, M. D., Dansville, N. Y. 
 P. W. Neefus, M. D., Rochester, N. Y. 
 James K. King, M. D., Watkins, N. Y. 
 Jefferson Scales, INI. D., New Brighton, N. Y. 
 Seth S. Goldthwaite, M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 ]j. S. Dixon, M. D. (Harvard), Boston, Mass. 
 T. M. Strong, M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 John J. Shaw, M. D., Plymouth, Mass. 
 
 Sanford Hanscom, M.D.,E. SomervilIe,Mass.: 
 
 " And without pain." 
 Ernest N. Noyes, M. D., Newburyport, Mass. 
 David Clark, M. D., Springfield, Mass. 
 John Sanborn, M. D., Melrose, Mass. 
 
 B. F. Moulton, M. D., Lawrence, Mass. 
 George M. Morse, M. D., Clinton, Mass. 
 
 C. C. Cundall, M. D., Fairhaven, Mass. 
 Daniel Humphrey, M. D., Lawrence, Mass. 
 Herbert,F. Pitcher, M. D., Haverhill, Mass. 
 Wm. Winslow Eaton, M. D. (Univ. of N. Y.), 
 
 Dan vers, Mass. 
 
 S. K. Merrick, M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 
 William H. Carpenter, M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 
 Benjamin H. Hartwell, M. D., Ayer, Mass. 
 
 Walter Channing, M. D., Brookline, Mass. 
 
 John Homer, M. D., Newburyport, Mass. 
 
 Wm. H. Milliken, M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 
 Camille Cote, M. D., Marlboro', Mass. 
 
 Charles N. Page, M. D., Danvers, Mass. 
 
 Frank E. Biuidy, M. D., Boston, Mass.: — 
 "And without pain, when practicable." 
 
 W. F. Wesselhoeft, M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 
 Elisha Chenery, M. D., Boston, Mass.: — 
 " II. and III. should go together." 
 
 Wm. P. Stutson, M. D., Cuinmington, Mass. 
 
 Sarah Hackett Stevenson, M. D., Chicago, 111. 
 
 Rachel H. Carr, M. D., Chicago, 111. 
 
 Almon Brooks, M. D., Chicago, 111. 
 
 George M. Palmer, M. D. 
 
 W. B. Lewert, M. D., San Francisco, CaL 
 
 Charles W. Stockman, M. D., Portland, Me. 
 
 Rev. Dr. Wilford L. Robbins, Albany, N. Y. 
 
 Rev. O. B. Frothingham, Boston, Mass. 
 
 Rev. Dr. HiratioStebbins, San Francisco, Cal. 
 
 Rev. Dr. B. L. Agnew, Philadelphia, Pa. 
 
 Rev. R. Leroy Lockwood. Broomtield, N. J. 
 
 Rev. Henry Blanchard, Portland, M'3. 
 
 Rev. M. J. Savage, Boston, Mass. 
 
 Rev. Dr. William Salter, Burlington, Ohio. 
 
 Rev. Charles F. Dole, Boston, Mass. 
 
 Rev. Dr. Thomas K. Beecher, Elmira, N. Y. 
 
 Rev. Dr. H. W. Thomas, Chicago, 111.: — 
 "I favor this statement; but as far as 
 possible vivisection should be painless." 
 
 Rev. Dr. Thomas B. Angell, Harrisburg, Pa. : 
 "The second statement most nearh' repre- 
 sents my ideas, although the reasons 
 advanced in the third statement and 
 the limitations therein suggested also 
 strongly appeal to me. Regarding 
 vivisection as a method of study in 
 some public and private schools, I hold 
 the stj'ongest opinions; namely, that 
 such use should be utterly, entirely, 
 and definitely prohibited under the 
 extremest penalties." 
 
VIVISECTION RESTRICTED BY UTILITY. 
 
 49 
 
 Rev. Dr. Howard A. Johnston, Chicago, III. 
 
 Rev. Dr. Thomas C. Hall, Chicago, 111. 
 
 Rev. William \V. Jordan, Clinton, Mass. 
 
 Rev. Dr. Wm. R. Richards, Plainfield, N. J.: 
 "This statement commends itself to my 
 judgment. ... 1 am sometimes made 
 uneasy by what seems to me a tendency 
 at present towards excessive control of 
 individual libert}^ by law." 
 
 Rev. Dr. William Bryant, Editor of the 
 
 "Michigan Presbyterian," Mt. Clemens, 
 
 ^lichigan: — 
 
 " No. III. most nearly meets my views, but 
 
 I see some points in I. and II. with 
 
 which I also agree. I question how far 
 
 vivisection is valuable." 
 
 Rev. Dr. J. De Hart Bruen, Belvidere, N. J.: 
 " I appreciate the great difficulty in making 
 restrictions ; yet a reasonable law, I be- 
 lieve, could be drawn and enforced 
 which would check abuse, and yet not 
 seriously embarrass the search for use- 
 ful facts." 
 
 Rev. Alfred Noon, Ph.D., Boston, Mass. : 
 " While on the whole favoring this presen- 
 tation, I sign witii two expressions of 
 modification: 1. The utility idea should 
 be modified by the provision of painless- 
 ness. 2. iVm not clear that the State is 
 the best repository of power. In many 
 communities the local government could 
 enforce better than the wider constitu- 
 ency." 
 
 Rev. Charles H. Walker, Lansingburgh, N. Y. 
 (Adds final paragraph of statement II. to 
 this statement.) 
 
 Rev. Dr. William H. Davis, Detroit, Mich. 
 
 Rev. H. L. Mitchell, Ph.B., Mystic, Conn.: 
 " While I should be glad to see all infliction 
 of unnecessary suffering upon our dumb 
 friends abolished, yet I think that the 
 restriction of the practice of vivisection 
 by law is the most practicable way to 
 diminish the evil at present." 
 
 Rev. Dr. Edward B. Goodwin, Chicago, 111. : 
 '•I believe most heartily in the restrictions 
 indicated under this head, and I would 
 have the law of restrictions most rig- 
 idly applied, and its penalties rigidly 
 enforced." 
 
 Rev. Dr. Isaac J. Lansing, Boston, Mass.: 
 " I favor this, with a leaning toward No. I. 
 It is solely a question whether men can 
 be saved from suffering by inflicting 
 the least possible suffering on lower 
 creatures." 
 
 Rev. Dr. W. M. Paden, Philadelphia, Pa. 
 Rev. Dr. T. Komeyn Beck, Oakland, Cal. 
 Rev. Dr. George M. Steele, LL.D., Ex-Pres. 
 Lawrence University, Auburndale, Mass. 
 Rev. Dr. Rufus A. White, Chicago. III.: — 
 "This my judgment signs; my sympathies 
 sign the first." 
 
 Rev. Dr. John McCiellan Holmes: — 
 
 " I am disposed to annex to this statement 
 the views expressed in No. II." 
 
 Rev. John W. Chadwick, Brookh'n, N. Y. : 
 " I heartily approve of at least so much re- 
 striction as is here indicated." 
 
 Rev. Dr. E. Winchester Donald, Boston, Mass : 
 " Permission to practise vivisection should 
 be granted only by a license issued by 
 a competent hoard. Vivisection with- 
 out such a license should be made a 
 punishable offence." 
 
 Rev. Dr. John Henry Burrows, Chicago, 111. 
 (Dr. Burrows would make the seventh line 
 stronger by inserting " very narrow " 
 before the word " limitations.") 
 
 Rev. Dr. Thaddeus A. Snively, Chicago, III. 
 Rev. J. E. Roberts, Kansas City, Mo. 
 Rev. Wm. H. Clark, Bay City, Mich. : — 
 
 " Without pain whenever possible." 
 Rev. S. B. Alderson, D. D., Topeka, Kan. 
 
 (Erases last two paragraphs.) 
 
 Rev. Marcus N. Preston, Bath, N. Y. 
 
 Rev. L. H. Hallock. D. D., Tacoma, Wash. 
 
 Rev. S. H. Cobb, Richfield Springs, N.Y. .. 
 
 Rev. V. L. Lockwood, D. D., Bloomfield, N.J. 
 
 Rev. Joseph Osgood, Cohasset, Mass. 
 
 Rev. Louis C. Washburn, Rochester, N. Y. 
 
 Rev. Samuel C. Palmer, St. Louis, ^lo. 
 
 Rev. A. A. Kiehle, D. D., Milwaukee, Wis. 
 
 Rev J. M. Seymour, Norwalk, Ohio. 
 
 Rev. L. R. Dalrymple, Reading, Pa. 
 
 Rev. Arthur C. Powell, Baltimore. iMd. 
 
 Rev. D. W. Coxe, Archdeacon of Scranton, Pa. 
 
 Rev. S. W. Derby, Rockville, Conn. 
 
 Rev. C. P. Anderson, Oak Park, III. 
 
 Rev. Frederick L. Hosmer, St. Louis, Mo. 
 
 Rev. William B. Clark, Seneca Falls, N. Y. : 
 "Utilit}'' to be unquestionable, and vivisec- 
 tion to be without pain so far as 
 possible." 
 
 Rev. I. W. Hathaway, D. D., Jersey City, N. J. 
 Rev. Fred T. Ronse, Plantsville, Ct. 
 Rev. John Rouse, M. A. (Oxon.), Chicago, 111. 
 Rev. Edward Abbott, D. D., Cambridge, Mass. 
 Rev. Henry H. Stfbbins, Rochester, N. Y. 
 Rev. Cornelius W. ISInrrow, Norwich, Conn. 
 Rev. James W. Cooper, New Britain, Conn. 
 
50 
 
 VIVISECTION KESTRICTED BY UTILITY. 
 
 Rev. John Acwnrth, New York City. 
 
 Kev. Walter M. Barrows, D. D., Rockford, 111. 
 
 Rev. Charles. Townsend, Cleveland, Ohio. 
 
 Rev. Henry L. Jones, Wilkesbarre, Pa. 
 
 Rev. Thomas L Cole, Portland, Oregon. 
 
 Rev. Arthur L. Williams, Chicago, 111. 
 
 Rev. W. R. Huntington, D. D., Rector of 
 
 Grace Church, New York City. 
 Rev. C. D. W. Bridgman, New York City. 
 Rev. W. J. Petrie, Chicagi), 111. 
 Rev. Edwin P. Thomson, Springfield, Ohio. 
 Kev. Judson Titsworth, Milwaukee, Wis. 
 Rev. Frank Russell, Bridgeport, Conn. 
 Rev. C. S. Nickerson', Racine, Wis. 
 Rev. Albert W. Ryan, Diiluth, Mich. 
 Rev. Samuel B. Stewart, Lynn, Mass. 
 
 (Erases last line but one, and inserts the 
 
 stronger phraseology of the last four 
 
 lines of II.) 
 
 Rev. Clinton Douglas, Des Moines, Iowa. 
 Rev. S. C. Beach, Bangor, Me. 
 Rev. Austin B. Bassett, B. D., Ware, Mass. 
 Rev. James McLeod, D. D., Scrauton, Pa. 
 Rev. Percy Browne, Boston, Mass. 
 Rev. Arthur W. Little, D. D., Evanston, 111. 
 Rev. J. L. Parks, S. T. D., Pi^iladelphia, Pa. 
 Rev. C. H. Hamlin, Easthampton, Mass. 
 Rev. Theo. B. Foster, Pawtucket, R. I. 
 Rev. P. N. Meade, Oswego, N. Y. 
 Itev. Calviu M. Clark, Haverhill, Mass. 
 Rev. Edward C. Ewing, Danvers, Mass. 
 Rev. Leon P Marshall, Franklin, Ind. 
 Rev. James M. Patterson, Detroit, Mich. 
 Rev. William W. Kno.x, D. D., New Bruns- 
 wick, N. J. : — 
 "With the least possible pain." 
 
 Rev. Irving W. Metcalf, Cleveland, Ohio. 
 Rev. Frederick AL Kerkees. Meadville, Pa. 
 Rev. Henry H. Sleeper, Ph.D., Elizabeth, N.J. 
 Rev. D. A. Newton, Winchester. Mass. 
 Rev. George F. Smythe. ]\Iount Vernon, Ohio. 
 Rev. (t. a. Alcott. M. A.. Danielsonville, Ct. 
 Rev. Edward ISIcArthur Noyes, Newton 
 
 Centre, ]Mass. 
 Rpv. James H. Van Buren, Lynn, iSInss. 
 Rev. Emery H. Porter, Newport, R. I. 
 Rev. John H. Egar, D. D., Rome, X. Y. 
 Rev. John II. Griffith, Albany, N. Y. 
 Rev. H. S. Rablee, Charlotte, Mich. 
 Rev. Russell T. Hall, Greenwich, Conn. 
 Rev. M. D. Edv.-ards, D. D.. St. Paul, Minn. 
 Rev. J. Spencer Voorhees, M. A., West Win- 
 
 sted, Conn. 
 Rev. S. M. Crothers, Cambridge, Mass. 
 Rev. Raymond H. Stearns, Bainbridge, N. Y. 
 Rev. John P. Peters, New York City. 
 Rev.. Thomas H. Sill, New York City. 
 
 Rev. Joseph Gambee, Plattsburgh, N. Y. 
 Rev. D. L. Sanford, Bellows Falls, Vt. 
 Rev. B. W. Lockhart, Manchester, N. H. 
 Rev. W. L. Phillips, D. D., New Haven, Conn. 
 Rev. George A. Paull, Bloomfield, N. J. 
 
 (Adds last clause of II.) 
 Rev. Frederick Gibson, D. D., Baltimore, Md. 
 Rev. William Lloyd Himes, Concord, N. H. 
 Rev. Charles Herr, S. T. D., Jersey City, N. J. 
 Rev. Albert M. Hilliker, Washington, D. C. 
 Rev. G. S. Mott, D. D., Flemington, N. Y. 
 Rev. William Ballon, Fargo, N. D. 
 Rev. J. R. Collier, Louisville, Ky. 
 Rev. Andrew C. Browne, Peoria, 111. 
 Rev. George E. Martin, St. Louis, Mo. 
 Rev. Caroline J. Bartlett, Kalamazoo, Mich. 
 Rev. William Dallmann (Editor of the 
 
 " Lutheran Witness "), Baltimore, Md. 
 Rev. David Magie, Paterson, N. J. 
 Rev. Charles T.^ Haley, D. D , Newark, N. J. 
 Rev.' A. Gosman, Lawrenceville : — 
 
 " But practised only by scientific men and 
 for clearly scientific ends." 
 Rev. Wayland Spaulding, Poughkeepsie, N. Y. 
 Rev. George O. Little, Washington, D. C. 
 Rev. T. J. Lamont, M. A., Olympia, Wash. 
 Rev. W. F. Paddock, D. D., Philadelphia, Pa. 
 Kev. Dr. J. A. Pollock, Lebanon, Ind. 
 Rev. W. E. Allen, Sherburne, N. Y. 
 Rev. Wm. R. Mulford, New Haven, Conn. 
 Rev. William R. Campbell, Roxburv, Mass. 
 Rev. Christopher G. Hazard, Catskill, N. Y. 
 Rev. Amos Skeele, Rochester, N. Y. 
 Rev. E. L. House, S. T. B., Altleboro, Mass. 
 Rev. A. McCullngh, D. D., Worcester, Mass. 
 Rev. Willard B. Thorp. Binghamton, N. Y. 
 Rev. Robert E. Ely, Cambridgeport, Mass. 
 Rabbi Abraham R. Levy, B. Ph., Chicago, 111. 
 Rev. James Roberts. D. D., Colwyn, Pa. 
 (Accepts II. as best expression of his views 
 while not endorsing its entire phrase- 
 olo?y.) 
 Rev. Dr. A. S. Fiske, Ithaca, N. Y.: — 
 
 '•I believe this practice should be regulated 
 by intelligent laws, restricted to com- 
 petent and authorized persons and fit 
 phices, and conducted solely in the in- 
 terests of relief to human pains and 
 diseases." 
 Rev. Fred. E. Dewhurst, Indianapolis. Ind. 
 Rev. George Hutchinson Smith, D. D., East 
 
 Orange, N. J. 
 Rev. Samuel Cedsall, Chicago, 111. 
 Rev. Dr. John Acworth, New York City. 
 Rev. Clifford W. Barnes, R. D., Chicago, 111. 
 Rev. Dr. Edmund Q. S. Osgood, B. D., Hyde 
 Park, Mass. 
 
VIVISECTION RESTKICTED BY UTILITY. 
 
 51 
 
 Rev. Dr. Myron Adams, Rochester, N. Y. 
 
 Rev. Nathaniel Seaver, Jr., Leicester, Mass.: 
 "I would confine vivisection to medical and 
 scientific scliools, and proliibit it else- 
 where altogether, especially in presence 
 of minors." 
 
 Rev. A S. Garver, D. D., Worcester, Mass. 
 
 Rev. T. M. Hodgdoii, West Hartford, Conn. : 
 " Vivisection should be without pain so far 
 as possible." 
 
 Rev. Dr. Wm. A. Keese, Lawrence, Mass.: 
 " I am by no means sure but that the first 
 statement is correct; yet not having 
 special knowledge on the subject, I 
 incline to the more conservative opin- 
 ions of this statement." 
 
 Rev. Dr. C. E. S. Rasay, Carthage, N. Y. : . 
 " I should favor absolute prohibition of 
 vivisection did I not think that there 
 are times when its practice results in 
 good so great as to justif}' the sacrifice 
 of the animal. Undoubtedly these cases 
 are rare, and restrictions should be made 
 even stronger than indicated above."' 
 
 Rev. Dr. T. T. Munger, New Haven, Conn.: 
 "Vivisection should 'be under strict and 
 careful supervision, but with a leaning 
 to No. IL I would confine it to experts 
 for the sake of di^^covery, and shut it 
 out as means of demonstrating estab- 
 lished facts." 
 
 Rev. Wm. C. Stiles, D. D., Jackson, Mich.: 
 " Vivisection should always be without pain 
 when anaesthetics do not prevent the 
 experiment." 
 
 Rev. .Joseph J. Woolley, Pawtucket, R. I. 
 
 Rev. John G.. Davenport, S. T. D., Water- 
 burj', Conn. 
 
 Francis Ellingwood Abbott, Ph.D., Cam- 
 bridge, Mass. : — 
 '■ The above statement comes the nearest 
 to expressing my views on the subject, 
 but I object strongly to the word ' util- 
 ity.' Vivisection is a human action, a 
 part of conduct, and all conduct must 
 be governed by ethical principle, not 
 mere calculation of consequences. Vivi- 
 section, if really conducive to knowl- 
 edge (of which I am no judge), may be 
 prompted by motives of the purest 
 moral character, by the purpose of in- 
 flicting some pain to prevent greater 
 pain, as in surgical or dental operations. 
 Only as a means to mercy and ultimate 
 diminution of suffering ought vivisec- 
 tion to be tolerated." 
 
 Rev. S. J. Smith, Ph.D., St. Paul, Minn. 
 
 Rev. George T. Linsley, Newtown, Conn. 
 
 Rev. H. R. Lockwood, S. T. D., Syracuse,N.Y. 
 
 Rev. E. C. Murra}-, D. D., Clinton, S. C. 
 
 Rev. A. C. Kimber, S. T. D., New York City. 
 
 Rev. Sam'l Scoville, D. D., Stamford, Conn.: 
 " With a very strong leaning toward No. II. 
 and looking for the time when No. I. 
 shall be the law." 
 
 Rev. Barton O. Aylesworth, LL.D., President 
 of Drake University, Des Moines, Iowa. 
 
 Edwin L. Godkin, Editor of "The Nation," 
 New York City. 
 
 W. J. Rolfe, Ph.D., Ed'itor and Author, Cam- 
 bridge, Mass. 
 
 Carlos Martyn, LL.D., Editor, Chicago, 111. 
 
 F. B. Sanborn, Journalist, Concord, Mass. 
 Hjalmar H. Boyesen, Author; Professor at 
 
 Columbia College, New York. 
 Nathan H. Dole, Literarian, Boston, Mass.: 
 "Under only the most stringent restric- 
 tions! " 
 
 G. W. Turner, Editor, New York City. 
 Geo. Wm. Winterburn, M. D., Editor, New 
 
 York City. 
 
 A. Ludlow White, Editor, New York City. 
 
 W. C. Dunn, Editor, New York City. 
 
 John Y. Foster, Editor, New York City. 
 
 E. J. Wheeler, A. M., Editor.'New York City. 
 
 Sam'l T. Pickard, Editor, Portland, Me. 
 
 H. L. Hastings, Editor, Boston, Mass. 
 
 E. F. Hartshorne, Editor, Boston, Mass. 
 
 A. W. Stevens, Editor, Cambridge, Mass. 
 
 Louise M. Hodgkins, Editor, Boston, Mass. 
 
 Ernest E. Russell, Editor, New York City. : 
 " No experiments involving pain should be 
 permitted in the class-room. Cases are 
 conceivable, however, where such ex- 
 periments may be justified, if conducted 
 as humanely as possible, and with due 
 sense of the grave responsibility as- 
 sumed by the investigator, and of his 
 moral obligation to restrict the suffer- 
 ing of the creature experimented upon 
 within the narrowest bounds consist- 
 ent with the attainment of the object 
 sought." 
 
 Albert G. Roynton, Editor, Detroit, Mich. 
 
 Amos R. Wells, Editor, Boston, Mass. 
 
 Ernest R. Willard, Editor, Rochester', N. Y. 
 
 John Lemley, Editor, Albany, N. Y. 
 
 Henry Abbott Steele, Editor, Newark, N. J. 
 
 James H. Potts, Editor, Detroit, Mich. 
 
 Stephen Quinon, Journalist, Pittsburg, Pa. 
 
 T. J. Keenan, Jr., Editor, Pittsburg, Pa. 
 
 Frank Kasson, Editor of "Education," 
 Boston, Mass. 
 
52 
 
 VIVISECTION KESTRICTED BY UTILITY. 
 
 R. S. Thompson, Editor, Springfield, Ohio. 
 
 C. A. Clardy, M. D., Nevvstead, Ky. 
 
 Gov. Wni. A. Richards, Cheyenne, W^vo. 
 
 Gov. J. M. Stone, Jackson, Miss. 
 
 Gov. Claude Mathews, Indiana. 
 
 Gov. D. Russell Brown, Providence, R. I. 
 
 Gov. John Gary Evans, Columbia, S. C. 
 
 Hon. J. A. T. Hull, M. C, Des Moines, Iowa. 
 
 Hon. J. T. M. Cleary, M. C, Mankato,Minn. 
 
 Hon. R. W. Tayler, M. C, New Lisbon, Ohio. 
 
 Hon. Alex. M. Hardy, M. C, Washington. 
 
 Hon. Matthew Griswold, M. C, Erie, Pa. 
 
 Hon. F. C. Layton, M. C, Wapakoneta, Ohio. 
 
 Hon. C. N. Fowler, M. C, Elizabeth, N. J. 
 
 George C. Holt, Esq., New York City: — 
 " The law should defiue the general classes 
 of cases in which vivisection should be 
 allowed, and medical officials should 
 issue a license in advance for the pro- 
 posed experiments, clearly fixing the 
 nature of them." 
 
 Hon. C. F. Buck, M. C , New Orleans, La.: 
 "Regulation should be universal; the civil- 
 ized countries should unite action." 
 F. R. Coudert, Esq., New York City. 
 Hon. Biuger H. Hermann, M. C, Washing- 
 ton, D. C. 
 James R. Howe, M. C, Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 Hon. Frank M. Eddy, M. C, Glenwood, Minn. 
 Hon. W. C. Owens, M. C, Georgetown, Ky. 
 Hon. Charles A. Towne, M.C. (Ph.B.), Du- 
 
 luth, Minn. 
 Hon. W. M. Denny, M. C, Scranton, Miss. 
 Hon. H. M. Baker, M. C, Bow Mills, N. H. 
 Hon E.' J. Murphy, M. C, East St. Louis, HI- 
 Hon. W. K. Ellis, M. C, Heppner, Ore. 
 Hon. I. P. Wanger, M. C, Norristown, Pa. 
 Hon. A. B.Wright. M.C, North Adams.Mass, 
 Rev. William M. Salter, Philadelphia, Pa. 
 B. De Witt, M. D., Oswego, N. Y. 
 George E. Mucuen, M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 Henry W. Boorn, M. D., Schenevus, N. Y. 
 
 2. Signers accepting the main Propositions, but altering Phraseology. 
 
 Charles Eliot ISTokton, LL. D., Harvard University, Cambridge, 
 Mass. 
 
 John H. Gladstone, D. Sc, F. R. S., London, England. 
 Asaph Hall, Jr., Professor of Astronomy, University of Michigan, 
 Ann Arbor. 
 
 C. R. Van Hise, Professor of Geology, University of Wisconsin, 
 Madison : — 
 
 (Signs last two paragraphs.) " It is not wise to mal^e restrictions based 
 upon known utility." 
 
 Eev. John J. McCook, Trinity College, Hartford, Conn. : — 
 
 " There are not probably many men who would conduct experiments 
 involving pain or loss of Ufe without using an anaesthetic, unless there were 
 some real and convincing necessity ; and yet I have witnessed some. I fea,r 
 it is a fact that vivisection inevitably tends to make the conscience of the 
 operator a trifle too easy in regard to the whole matter. Restraint ought to 
 be carefully limited, however." 
 
 Prof. A. D. F. Hamlin, Columbia College, New York City. 
 Prof. D. Bodlight, North Western University, Evanston, 111. 
 EossiTER W. Eaymond, New York City. 
 
 Sir Joseph Fayrer, M. D., K. C. S. I., Surgeon General, London : 
 (Sir eT. Fayrer strikes out several words and clauses, particularly the 
 references to ]\Iagendie and Mantagazza. He leaves, however, the follow- 
 lowing sentences intact -.) 
 
 " We regard as cruel and wrong the infliction of torment upon animals 
 in the search for physiological facts which have no conceivable relation to the 
 
VIVISECTION RESTRICTED BY UTILITY. 
 
 53 
 
 treatment of human diseases. . . . We consider as wholly unjustifiable the 
 practice of subjecting animals to torture in the laboratory or class-room 
 merely for the purpose of demonstrating well-known and accepted facts. 
 . . . Such experiments as these are degrading in tendency." 
 
 (Reference is often made to Sir J. Fayrer's numerous experiments in 
 India on snake-poison ; and his indorsement of the foregoing paragraphs is 
 the more striking as coming fi-om one of the leading experimenters.) 
 
 IMalcolm McLean, M. D., Surgeou-in-charge, St. Andrew's In- 
 firmary, New York City : — 
 
 "... Vivisection should be limited to actual necessity of such research, 
 and not be so generally practised for demonstration only." 
 
 Hon. SiMEOx E. Baldwin, New Haven, Conn. : — 
 " Restricted by utility and humanity." 
 
 Prof. E. I. James, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa. 
 A. T. Bristow, M. D., Surgeon at the Long Island College Hospital, 
 Brooklyn, N. Y. : — 
 
 "It is unfair to Science to ask her in all cases to state what she expects 
 to prove by a given line of experimentation. Often, we can only 'try and 
 see.' Nor can one state that any particular physiological fact will never bear 
 some relation to the treatment of disease. I am entirely ia accord with the 
 third paragraph." 
 
 Jerome Walker, M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 Herbert F. Williams, M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 Robert T. Edes, M. D. (formerly Professor at 
 
 the Harvard Medical School), Saratoga, 
 
 New York. 
 Lewis O. Goetchius, M. D., Saratoga, N. Y. 
 Julius J. Kempe, M. D., Rochester, N. Y. 
 W. 0. Stillman, M. D., Albany, N. Y. 
 C. E. Stebbins, M. D., .Morris, N. Y. 
 E. G. Inlay, M. D., Saratoga Springs, N. Y. 
 G. W. Sargent, M. D., Seneca Castle, N. Y. 
 Wm. C. Nay, M. D., Elmira, N. Y. 
 Wm. More Decker, M. D., Kingston, N. Y. 
 Chas. IT. Perry, M. D., Oneida, N. Y. 
 Jos. Hasbrouck, M. D., Dobbs Ferry, N. Y. 
 
 (Apparently signs only last paragraph.) 
 J. A. Irwin, M. A. (Cantab.), M. D., New 
 
 York City. 
 John Cabot, M. D., New York City. 
 Alex. W. Stein, M. D., New York City. 
 George G. Needham, M. D., New York City. 
 Wm. A. Valentine, M. D., New York City. 
 H. J. Garrigues, M. D.. New York City. 
 John W. Elliot, M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 Sa'ome Merritt, M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 E. W. Gushing, JL D., Boston, Mass. 
 Henry C. Angell. M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 R. C. Macdonald, M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 W. Thornton Parker, M. D., Groveland, Mass. 
 
 Wm. 0. Faxon, M. D., Stoughton, Mass. 
 
 D. W. Vanderbergh, M. D,, Fall River, Mass. 
 
 E. B. Cutler, M. D., Waltham, Mass. 
 J. N. Danforth, M. D., Chicago, 111. 
 
 G. H. Parkhurst, M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y.: 
 " Utility alone cannot give Science her 
 authority, and that utility which would 
 demonstrnte that which we have already 
 repeatedly demonstrated should be ex- 
 cluded. Neither should the infliction of 
 pain be permitted. Vivisection should 
 be permitted to competent and trust- 
 worthy persons, and restricted to 
 licensed j>lnces which shall be open at 
 all times to inspection by agents of 
 humane societies, by members of the 
 medical profession, or bv officers dulv 
 appointed or empowered by law." 
 
 Susan E. Crocker, M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 Joseph P. Paine, M. D., Roxbury, Mass. 
 (Erases "to determine action of new 
 remedies.") 
 
 C. E. Banks. M. D., Vineyard Haven, Mass.: 
 " I sign this without adopting all the lan- 
 guage or sentiment of it. ... I agree 
 to the desirability of prohibiting the 
 demonstration of well-known physio- 
 logical facts before classes." 
 
54 
 
 VIVISECTION RESTEICTED BY UTILITY. 
 
 Francis E. Corey, M. D., Westboro, Mass. 
 
 (Erases lines 13-14, as to degrees of pain.) 
 Sam. B. Woodward, M. D., Worcester, Mass. 
 J. H. Hobart Burge, M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y.: 
 " The above statement is a fair presentation 
 of my personal views." (Dr. Burge 
 erases tlie word "common" in nine- 
 teenth line.) 
 George C. Webber, M. U., Millburj', Mass.: 
 " I think it quite impossible to say that any 
 phN'siological f;\ctean have ' no relation 
 to the treatment of human diseases.' " 
 J. T. G. Nichols, M. D., Cambridge, Mhss. 
 James T. Walker, M. D., Falmouth, Mass. 
 
 (Erases 4th line to " necessity-.") 
 Mary A. Mixer, M. D,, Chicago, 111. 
 
 (Erases lines 13-14, as to degrees of pain.) 
 Thomas W. Busche, M. D., New York City. 
 Prof. Francis Valk, M. D.,N. Y. Postgraduate 
 
 College, N. Y. . 
 J. N. Wright, 1\I. D., Grand Gorge, N. Y. 
 (He says of paragrapli III. referring to pain- 
 ful demonstrations, " Especialh' good. 
 Too much of this is done.'') 
 William F. Dudley, M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 (Dr. Dudley would strike out paragraph 
 referring to instantaneous death and the 
 clause which follows.) 
 Lt.-Col. Alfred A. AVoodluill. "SI. D., LL.D., 
 Deputy Surgeon-General, U. S. A. 
 (Col. Woodhull erases references to Ma- 
 gendie and Mantagazza and a large 
 number of single words wjiicii appear to 
 him superfluous. He indorses, liowever, 
 the statements condemning repetition of 
 painful experiments for demonstration 
 and favoring legal restrictions.) 
 Prof. Joseph Ransohoff, M. D., F. R. C. S., 
 Professor of Surgery, Medical College of 
 Ohio, Cincinnati, Ohio. 
 (Erases first sentence of third paragraph 
 and adds "except under anesthesia.") 
 Prof. C. M. Cary, Professor of Physiology 
 Auburn, Ala. 
 
 Rev. Hermann Lebentlial, -Weatliersfield, Ct.: 
 
 " With a broader detinition of utilit}-." 
 William Morton Payne, Associate Editor of 
 "The Dial," Chicago, 111.: — 
 " ' Vertebrates ' should be substituted for 
 ' animals ' throughout. With inverte- 
 brates our sympathies would be 
 wasted." 
 Pres. Jos. W. Mauck, State University of 
 
 South Dakota, Vermillion, S. D. 
 Pres. Samuel W. Boardman, Maryville Col- 
 lege, Maryville, Tenn. 
 Pres. George Sverdrup, Augsberg Seminary, 
 
 IMinneapolis, Minn. 
 Rev. Dr. W^ H. Ward, LL.D., Superintending 
 liditor of " The Independent," N. Y. City. 
 H. K. Carroll, LL.D., Religious Editor of 
 
 " The Independent,"' New York City. 
 H. L. Wayland, Editor, Philadelphia, Pa. 
 Samuel Sexton, M. D., New York City : — 
 " I do not care to indorse some parts of the 
 statement, but j'ou may classify me in a 
 general way as opposed to the abuses of 
 vivisection as they now exist." 
 Rev. S. B. Pond, Norwalk, Cona. 
 Rev. S. W. Meek, Peoria, III. 
 Rev. S. P. Wilder, Janesville, Wis. 
 Rev. S. G. Wood, Easthampton, Mass. 
 Rev. W. G. Andrews, D. D., Guilford, Conn. 
 Rev. Ciiarles E. St. John, Pittsburg, Pa.: 
 " Utility should include laboratory and 
 class-work demonstrations for mature 
 students, but not before children." 
 Rev. Dr. Henrv Van Dyke, New York City.- 
 (Strikes out from the middle of the 6th line 
 to the end of the 2(1 paragraph.) 
 Rev. Dr. W. P. Swartz, W^ilmington, Del. 
 Hon. Edgar Wilson, M. C, Boise City, Idaho. 
 (Erases line referring to " instantaneous 
 death." " In other respects I indorse 
 above statement.") 
 Hon. Wm. L. Terry, M. C, Little Rock. Ark. 
 (Erases references to Mantagazza ; lines 
 23-2.5 and part of lines 27-28. " Should 
 be . . . practise.") 
 
 Those -w^ho condemn Torture, for Teaching, but do not approve of 
 Legislation, nor of any Impediments to Original Research. Other 
 slight Changes in Phraseology are not infrequent. 
 
 Prof. James Law, F. R. C. V. S., Professor 
 
 of Veterinary Science, Cornell Univ., 
 
 Ithaca, N. Y. : — 
 
 " As regards the unnecessary repetition of 
 
 painful physiological experiment before 
 
 a class, or even in a laboratory, to illus- 
 
 trate a truth which is already proved, 
 it can only deserve the condemnation 
 of any man of humanity. . . . The in- 
 fliction of pain for the mere purpose of 
 demonstration is, in my opinion, wholl,v 
 unwarranted." 
 
VIVISECTION EESTRICTED BY UTILITY, 
 
 00 
 
 Prof. L. H. Bailey, College of Agriculture, 
 Cornell University, N. Y. : — 
 •' I subscribe to III. so far as the fundamental 
 position is concerned, but do not believe 
 in legal measures to control it. I should 
 prefer to control it by an agreement 
 among the leading educators of the 
 country.'' 
 
 Dr. George Trumbull Ladd, Professor of Psy- 
 chology, Yale College, Conn.: — 
 
 " This represents my views mqst nearly, 
 with the exception of the last clause. I 
 
 * have increasingly little respect for the 
 law-makers of this country on this or 
 any similar subject. I should far rather 
 trust the men who practise, vivisection, 
 unfeeling and brutal as many of them 
 undoubtedly are." 
 S. Thompson, Editor of the " Ciiicago Even- 
 ing Journal," Chicago, 111. : — 
 
 " In every case the end should justify tlie 
 means, and the experimenter should be 
 held to accountability whenever he 
 oversteps what is necessary to his search 
 after knowledge. Nothing should be 
 forgiven to exhibition or curiosit3^" 
 
 C. R. Williams, Journalist, Indianapolis, Ind. 
 Charles H. Levermore, Ph.D., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 (Erases last seven lines.) 
 
 Rev. Willis J. Beecher, Professor in Auburn 
 
 Theological Seminary, N. Y. 
 Prof. James M. Baldwin, Ph.D., Professor of 
 Psychology, Princeton University, N. J.: 
 "... The word ' utility ' is not to be de- 
 fined by popular opinion." (Professor 
 Baldwin considers experimentation jus- 
 tifiable in a variety of other circum- 
 
 stances than those named in the state- 
 ment ; "for example, one of the subjects 
 requiring extended experiments just 
 now is the physiological accompani- 
 ments and effects of pain." But this 
 is precisely the field in which Man- 
 tagazza lias been working and perform- 
 ing tlie most atrocious experiments with- 
 out any results of the slightest value.) 
 
 Rev. R. W. Brokaw, M. A., Springfield, Mass. 
 
 A. T. Cabut, M. U., Boston, Mass. 
 
 Morton H. Prince, M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 
 J. G- Hubbard, M. D., Holyoke, Mass. 
 
 Isaac H. Stearns, M. D., Lynn, Mass. 
 
 Angelo O. Squier, M. D., Springfield, Mass. 
 
 Edward P. Fowler, M. D., New Y^ork City. 
 
 Robert J. Wilding, M. D., Malone, N. Y. 
 
 Prof. F. B. Gummere, Haverford College, Pa. : 
 
 " Surely not State control through our 
 
 deplorable State legislatures ! The 
 
 question involves intelligence and 
 
 conscience." 
 
 E. Fletcher Ingals, M. D., Chicago, 111. 
 (Erases last paragraph.) 
 
 Prof. James Tyson, M. D., Univ. of Pennsyl- 
 vania, Philadelphia, Pa. 
 
 Homer E. Smith, J[. D., Norwich, N. Y. : 
 "With these provisos: (1) Prohibited in 
 different schools ; (2) Limited in medical 
 schools to painless experiments : (.3) No 
 restriction whatever in laboratories of 
 private investigators." 
 
 Rev. Dr. Cyrus S. Bate.s, Cleveland, Ohio: 
 "I would rather trust the final solution of 
 the vivisection question to education 
 and moral elevation than to legis- 
 lation." 
 
 Signers who apparently approve of certain Restrictions of Vivi- 
 section, but who do not condemn even painful Experiments, if' 
 approved by a Professor. 
 
 Sir Dyce Duckworth, M. D., LLD., Lecturer ! 
 
 at St. Bartholomew's Hosp., London, Eng. 
 Prof. John M. Tyler, Prof, of Biology, Am- 
 herst College, Mass. : — 
 " Amiesthetics should be employed v.'hen- 
 ever possible ; I do not think that they 
 can always be employed. I heartily 
 agree with the closing paragraph, that 
 vivisection should be controlled by the 
 law of the State." 
 George Seymour, M. D., Utica, N. Y. 
 Rev, James Eclls, D. D., Englewood, N. Y. 
 
 Albion W. Tourgee, Ph.D, LL.D., Author, 
 Mayville, N. Y. : — 
 " I do not think it incumbent on Science to 
 prove that vivisection is necessary. It 
 need not even be necessary at all; if it 
 be helpful to the student or operator. 
 then it should be allowed under proper 
 restrictions. ... I should vigorously 
 oppose any other restriction than that 
 of a well-guarded license," (Erases all 
 but last paragraph of the statement.) 
 
 Rev. G. H. Beard, Ph.D., So. Norwalk, Conn. 
 
56 
 
 VIVISECTION RESTRICTED BY UTILITY. 
 
 H. H. Baxter, M. D., Cleveland, Ohio. 
 
 (Considers painful experiments justifiable 
 
 for demonstration, if " not extended to 
 
 gratify an idle or morbid, or .even a 
 
 scientific, curiosity.") 
 
 Thomas M. L. Chrystie, A. M., M. D., New 
 
 York City. 
 Prof. F. A. Blackburn, Univ. of Chicago: 
 " I should be inclined to favor a restriction 
 on persons rather than on methods, — a 
 sj'stem of licenses that would authorize 
 a medical professor to practise vivisec- 
 tion at his own judgment as an aid in 
 
 teaching, but would prevent his students 
 from experimenting except under his 
 direction." 
 
 Edward P. Nichols, A. M., Boston, Mass. 
 
 P];of. Charles Foster Smith, Professor of 
 Greek, University of Michigan: — 
 " I have not much confidence in the wisdom 
 of a State or even a National Legislature 
 in dealing with such questions." (As 
 to restriction or non-restriction, he 
 would be guided by the decision of 
 scientific men.) 
 
 5. Those -whose Alterations nullify the -whole Statement. 
 
 Rev. Arthur Chase, B. D., Boston, Mass. : 
 " To trust the professor wholly, unless there 
 seemed reason for distrust, expresses to 
 ni}^ mind the best policy : vivisection 
 governed by the moral sense." 
 
 Prof. C. M. Grumbling, Professor of Biology, 
 etc., Iowa Weslej'an University, Mount 
 Pleasant, Iowa : — 
 " 1 lean to the side of freedom on the part of 
 specialists. He will nearlj' always ad- 
 minister an anfesthetic when operating 
 on the higher animals, unless the case 
 in hand forbids." 
 
 A. IT. Carvill, M. D., Somerville, Mass. 
 Alice F. Mills, M. D., Binghamton, N. Y. : 
 " Let anaesthetics be used whenever they 
 will not defeat the ends of science." 
 James Gerrie, M. D.. Brooklyn, N. Y. : 
 " Suffering may be necessary to make fact 
 clear to the student's mind." 
 Rev. Dr. W. Durant, Saratoga Springs, N. Y. 
 (Dr. Durant erases references to JIagendie 
 and Mantagazza, and would permit vivi- 
 section where there k probnhllity o^hexie- 
 fit and the suffering not greater than 
 "necessary to the end in view.") 
 A. Walter Suiter, M. D., Herkimer, N. Y. 
 James L. Turner. M. D., New York City: 
 " The benefit of ocular demonstrations is too 
 great to be ignored for the manifestation 
 of mere sentiment. Utility and neces- 
 sity should be the governing factors in 
 matters of this kind." 
 John C. Schapps M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y, 
 
 Prof. Edward D. Cope, Professor of Zoology, 
 etc., Univ. of Pennsylvania. 
 (Prof. Cope considers '' vihoWyjustiJialle the 
 common practice in the United States 
 of subjecting animals to torture for the 
 purpose of demonstrating well-known 
 facts," etc. He would control vivisec- 
 tion by the faculties of the various 
 institutions of learning, wherein it is 
 practised, such as " universities, acade- 
 mies of science, and medical schools." 
 They " should grant licenses to practise 
 vivisection to whomsoever they should 
 deem suitable persons.'") 
 Prof. Amos G. Warner, Econnniics and Social 
 Science, Stanford Univ., Cal. 
 (Erases all but the first sentence of the last 
 paragraph.) 
 Pres. George S. Burroughs, D. D., LL.D., 
 Wabash College, Crawfordsville, Ind. 
 (Dr. Bun-oughs does not believe in State 
 control, nor in legal abolition of painful 
 experiments.) 
 S. G. Shank, M. D., Albany, N. Y. 
 James L. Perry, M. D., New York City. 
 H. A. C. Anderson, M. D., New York bit\'. 
 A. A. Hubbell, M. D., Buffalo, N. Y. 
 Z. Edwards Lewis, JNI. D., New Rochelle, N. Y. 
 Edward T. Williams, M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 A. Lawrence Mason, M. D., Boston, Mass. 
 O. T. WJlsey, M. D., Amityville, N. Y. : — 
 " I believe in unrestricted vivisection by 
 scientific investigators, duly licensed." 
 George H. Weaver, M. D., Prof, of Pathology 
 in Northwestern Univ., Chicago, 111. 
 
VIVISECTION WITHOUT RESTRICTIONS. 57 
 
 IV (a), vivisection without restrictions. 
 
 Vivisection, or experimentation upon living creatures, must be 
 looked at simply as a method of studying the phenomena of Life. 
 With it morality has nothing to do. It should be subject neither 
 to criticism, supervision, nor restrictions of any kind. It may be 
 used to any extent desired by any experimenter (no matter what 
 degree of extreme or prolonged pain it may involve) for demon- 
 stration before students of the statements contained in their text- 
 books, as an aid to memory ; for confirmation of theories ; for original 
 research; or for any conceivable purpose of investigation into vital 
 phenomena. We consider that sentiment has no place in the phy- 
 siological laboratory; that animals have there no "rights" which 
 Man is called upon to notice or respect; that Science cannot be 
 "cruel" when her sole purpose is to investigate or demonstrate; that 
 it is as great an impertinence for Religion or Morality to assume to 
 sit in judgment upon a scientific method, or to dictate to physiolo- 
 gists limitations beyond which extreme pain " ouglU not to be 
 inflicted," as for Theology to tell the astronomer where in the skies 
 he should not direct his telescope, or the geologist what rocks he 
 must not break. 
 
 And finally, while we claim many discoveries of value in the treat- 
 ment of human ailments to have been due to experiments upon 
 animals, yet even these we regard as of secondary importance to the 
 freedom of unlimited re^earcli, and the independence of Scieiice from, 
 all restrictions or restraints , — agreeing largely with the statement of 
 Dr. Hermann, Professor of Physiology at Zurich, that "no true 
 investigator in his researches thinks of their practical utilization, 
 tliat the advamcement of Knowledfje, and not practical utility to 
 Medicine, is the true and straightforward object of all Vivisection." 
 
 President J. G. Schurman, Cornell University, Ithaca, N. Y. 
 •President David S. Jordan, M. D., Ph.D., LL.D., Stanford Uni- 
 versity, California : — 
 
 "I believe that any attempt to restrict vivisection in the hands of compe- 
 tent men, properly fitted to act as investigators, would be thoroughly 
 mischievous in its results. Nor do I believe that any considerable amount of 
 wanton pain has ever been inflicted by men whose original work as scientific 
 investigators entitles them to the name. On the other hand, I greatly depre- 
 cate the mischief done by persons who are not investigators, but who imitate 
 the actions of these for highly different purposes. The whole matter is one 
 for public opinion to regulate rather than the State. I do not find my views 
 expressed fully in any one of the four statements in the circular ; but if I 
 should sign any one of the four it would be this." 
 
58 VIVISECTION WITHOUT KESTRIGTIONS. 
 
 Prof. Joseph Le Conte, Professor of Geology and Natural History, 
 University of California, Berkeley : — 
 
 " I have carefully examined your jjropositions in regard to vivisection, 
 and cannot fully endorse any of them ; but in the present condition of things 
 in this country I believe I would rather sign this than any of the others. 
 The question in my mind is between the third and fourth. My objection to 
 the fourth is, that the mode of statement is too extreme. ... I believe 
 licenses should be given (but somewhat freely) to competent and responsible 
 persons, and then no restrictions on mode of experimentation. I believe 
 also it should be used for investigation, not for class-room demonstration. 
 
 V My objection to the third statement is the use of the word ' utility.' 1 
 firmly believe that vivisection should he used — and ivill always be mostly used — 
 for purely scientific purposes, icithout any reference to immediate and visible 
 utility. Science will not advance unless truth is sought mainly for its own 
 sake." , 
 
 (The italics are not in the original, but are here used to point out a sen- 
 tence which, slightly changed, is incorporated in the next statement.) 
 
 Prof. A. E. DoLBEAR, Professor of Physics, Tufts College, Mass. 
 
 Prof. Alphonse N. van Daell, Mass. Inst, of Technology, Boston. 
 
 (Professor van Daell erases all of the second sentence, and the word 
 
 " simply" in the first sentence. Vivisection should be without restrictions, 
 
 . "at least by persons unfamiliar with scientific methods, and incapable of 
 
 appreciating the value of experiment. The necessity or use of experiments 
 
 cannot be under anybody's but the professor's control.") 
 
 Prof. Theodore S. Woolsey, Yale Law School, New Haven, Ct, : 
 " I would advocate vivisection unrestricted except as to the class of ex- 
 perimenters engaging in it. These should be of education and attainments, 
 such as to warrant work of real scientific value. Perhaps a State Commission 
 of competent scientifitJ men could issue licenses." 
 
 Dr. Bashford Dean, Instructor in Biology, Columbia College, 
 New York. 
 
 Prof. H. S. MuNROE, E. M., Ph.D., Columbia College, New York. 
 Prof. J. U. Nef, Ph.D. (Munich), University of Chicago, Chicago, 111. 
 Prof. I. P. Egberts, Cornell University, Ithaca, N. Y. 
 Prof. W. F. McNuTT, M. D., M. Pv. C. S., Edinboro', University of 
 California, San Francisco. 
 
 Prof. John Henry Gray, Ph.D. (Halle), Northwestern Univer- 
 sity, Evanston, 111. 
 
 (Professor Gray does not wholly agree with this statement, but fails to 
 point out the special clauses to which objection is made. He adds : " I be- 
 lieve there should be restrictions, but not such as described. ) 
 Prof. Arthur Fairbanks, Ph.D., Yale Divinity School, New 
 Haven, Conn. : — 
 
 (Erases second sentence ) " In colleges and universities vivisection 
 should be without restrictions other than those imposed by the instructors." 
 
VIVISECTION WITHOUT KESTKICTIONS. 59 
 
 Prof. A. D. HuKT, LL.D., Tulane University, New Orleans, La. 
 . Prof. Jere. W. Jencks, Ph.D., Cornell University, Ithaca, N. Y. : 
 
 " Wliile the statement does not accurately express lAy views, it does so 
 more nearly than any of the others.'' 
 
 Prof. C. E. Babxes, Ph.D., University of Wisconsin, Madison. 
 
 (Professor Barnes erases the word " criticism " in the third sentence ; 
 inserts "reputable" before "experimenter;" erases the clause following, 
 referring to degree of pain, and from beginning of fifth sentence to end of 
 first paragraph.) 
 
 Prof. S. P. WiNANS, Ph.D., Princeton University, N. J. : — 
 " Vivisection should be without arbitrary, legal restrictions." 
 
 Prof. Geo. L. Bukk, Professor of History, Con^ell University, 
 Ithaca, N. Y. : — 
 
 "I can by no means assent to either of the four statements; but as my 
 conclusion would be this one, I venture to sign it." 
 
 Prof. George C. Comstock, Director of Washburn Observatory, 
 University of Wisconsin, Madison : — 
 
 " Vivisection should be without legal restrictions, until the evils of the 
 practice shall become more pronounced than they are at the present time." 
 
 Prof. F. Angell, Professor of Psychology, Stanford University, 
 California. ' 
 
 Prof. C. G. Gilbert, Ph.D., Professor of Zoology, Stanford Uni- 
 versity, California. 
 
 Prof. J. M. Stillman, Ph.D., Professor of Chemistry, Stanford 
 University, Calfornia. 
 
 John Fiske, M. A., LL.D., Author, Cambridge, Mass : — 
 
 " I would prohibit vivisection in class-rooms. I agree with the third 
 paragraph of your statement, ' Vivisection restricted by utility.' " 
 
 Dr. Paul Carus, Editor of the " Open Court," Chicago, 111. 
 Prof. Hexry Gradle, M. D., Northwestern University; formerly 
 in the chair of Physiology. 
 
 (Does not entirely endorse phraseology.) 
 
 Seneca D. Powell, M. D., Professor of Surgery, N. Y. Post-Grad- 
 uate Medical School, New York City. 
 
 Prof. E. Wtllys Andrews, M. D., Professor of Surgery, Chicago, 
 Illinois : — 
 
 " Appreciating the high motives of those who would. interfere, I neverthe- 
 less think each preceptor has a right to be his own guide in such matters, 
 and should be entirely unmolested." 
 
60 VIVISECTION WITHOUT KESTKICTIONS. " 
 
 Prof. Daniel R. Bkower, M. D., Professor of Materia Medicaand 
 Therapeutics, Eush Medical College. 
 
 Prof. Fleming Cabrow, M. D., University of Michigan. . 
 
 (Prof. Carrow erases the words included in parentheses, and the eighth 
 line in the statement.) 
 
 • Prof. Herman Knapp, M. D., New York College of Physicians 
 and Surgeons, New York City. 
 
 Prof. Barton Cooke Hurst, M. D., Professor of Obstetrics, Uni- 
 versity of Pennsylvania. 
 
 George F. Morris, M. D., late Professor of Physiology, New York 
 City. 
 
 Prof. James B. Herrick, M. D., Chicago, 111. : — 
 
 " Without restrictions save those imposed by the teacher or professor." 
 
 Conrad Wesselhoeft, M. D., Professor of Pathology and Thera- 
 peutics, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Mass. : — 
 
 " Without restrictions, except those of the moral sentiment of sympathy." 
 
 A. R. Wright, M. D., Buffalo, N. Y. : — 
 
 " Limit operations to responsible Professors in Laboratory, or oblige 
 every one to obtain a permit from a central authority." 
 
 E. Benjamin Ramsdell, M. D., New York City. 
 Samuel B. Ward, M. D., Professor of Theory and Practice of 
 Medicine, Albany Medical College, etc., Albany, N. Y. 
 Malcolm Leal, M. D., New York City ; — 
 
 " For purpose of investigation but not for class demonstration, except in 
 special cases where pain is slight and not prolonged." 
 
 Charles Jewett, A. M-, M. D., Consulting Physician to Kings Co. 
 Hospital, Professor of Obstetrics, Long Island College Hospital, etc., 
 Brooklyn, N. Y. : — 
 
 " Vivisection, or experimentation upon living creatures, may be used to 
 any extent necessary to the advancement of science for original research." 
 (Professor Jewett erases all the remainder of the statement, and adds :) 
 " The propositinmt are all so formulated that none hut a fanatic could subscribe 
 to any one of them.^' 
 
 SiGiSMDND Waterman, M, D. (Yale), New York City : — 
 "Your mode of procedure deserves hearty success." 
 
 With sixty-four other medical men, two educators, and three 
 statesmen. 
 
VIVISECTION WITHOUT RESTKICTIONS. 61 
 
 IV (b). vivisection without restrictions. 
 
 [As the uucompromisiug pliraseology of the first statement seemed objectionable 
 to many, a new statenieut was formuhited toward tlie close of the inquiry, and sent, 
 with preceding forms, princii^ally to members of the medical profession.] 
 
 ViviSECTioic, or experimentation upon living animals, must be 
 looked at simply as a method of studying the phenomena of Life; 
 and as such it should be subject neither to criticism, supervision, 
 nor restraints of any kind. 
 
 It may be used by any scientific experimenter to any extent he 
 may desire, for demonstration before students of the statements con- 
 tained in their text-books, as an aid to memory, or for any conceiv- 
 able purpose of investigation into vital phenomena. And, while 
 many discoveries of value in the treatment of human ailments have 
 undoubtedly been due to experiments on animals, yet even these 
 we regard as of secondary importance to the absolute freedom of 
 research, and the independence of Science from all restrictions and 
 restraints. P-ure Science, which exists for its own sake, stands on 
 a far higher plane than Science which exists merely for utility to 
 mankind. We firmly believe that Vivisection should be used, and 
 will always be mostly used, to add to pure scientific knowledge as sudi , 
 wltJiQut reference to any usefulness foreseen. Truth should be sought 
 for its own sake. Dr. Hermann, Professor of Physiology at Zurich, 
 has well said that "no true investigator in his researches thinks of 
 their practical utilization; that the advancement of Knowledge, and 
 not practical utility to ^Medicine, is the true and straightforward 
 object of all Vivisection." 
 
 We would not avoid the question of Pain. It is often the neces- 
 sity of Vivisection. But ISTature will not yield all her secrets with- 
 out a wrench. For instance, if only by causing acute suffering a 
 teacher can illustrate the functions of the nervous system, should 
 he, merely for that reason, stay his hand ? Ought we to insist that 
 an enthusiastic experimenter should forego any phase of research 
 whatever, simply because of the torture that research may perhaps 
 require ? Such questions- afford but one reply. Science does not 
 place reverence for Pity higher than its reverence for any new' fact 
 whatever. 
 
 In our judgment this question of Pain should be left absolutely to 
 the decision of the experimenter himself. He alone can determine 
 what degree of pain he needs to inflict for the success of his 
 experiment. No laws should constrain him, no critics judge him. 
 
62 VIVISECTION WITHOUT RESTRICTIONS. 
 
 RoswELL Park, M. D., Professor of Surgery, University of Buf- 
 falo, N. Y. 
 
 Francis H. Stuart, M. D., Obstetrician to Brooklyn Hospital, 
 Lecturer on Surgery, Long Island College Hospital, N. Y. : — 
 
 " I am in favor of vivisection without other restriction or restraint than 
 
 the conscience of the experimenter himself." 
 
 Nicholas Senn, M. D., Surgeon, Chicago, 111. 
 Henry M. Lyman, M.D., Chicago, 111. 
 
 J. H. Raymond, M. D., Professor of Physiology, Long Island Col- 
 lege Hospital, Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 
 J. PoHLMAN, Professor of Physiology, University of Buffalo, K. Y. : 
 " No incompetent or sentimental critics should judge him." 
 
 Frederick J. Nott, A. M., M. D., New York City : — 
 
 " Whatever restrictions are desirable may be best formulated by the 
 schools and institutions in and for which vivisection is principally done." 
 
 William J. Cronyn, M. D., Milwaukee, "Wis. : — 
 
 "... Dr. Bigelow's declaration that ' vivisection deadens the hum.anity 
 of the students' may possibly be true in a very limited number of cases, but 
 only in students whose humanity was a minimum to begin with. There are 
 Jesse Pomeroys that are not in prison ; a very few may be in the medical 
 profession* yet even in these cases it is better that their minimum of human- 
 ity be deadened, than that the world should through unnecessary ignorance 
 be deprived of many who have a great deal of it." 
 
 Mary Putnam Jacobi, M. D., New York City. 
 Abby Leach, Professor of Greek,Vassar College, Poughkeepsie,N.Y. 
 I. Adler, M. D., Professor of Clinical Pathology, N. Y. Polyclinic, 
 New York City. 
 
 S. Oscar Myers, M. D. , Mt. Vernon, N. Y. : — 
 
 " Although there mav be an occasional inhuman brute, I think the subject 
 may be safely left without legal restrictions." 
 
 Herbert M. Hill, Ph.D., Professor of Chemistry, University of 
 Buffalo, N. Y. 
 
 Israel C. Eussell, Professor of Geology, University of Michigan, 
 Ann Arbor. 
 
 Daniel Laferte, M. D., Professor of Anatomy, Detroit College 
 of Medicine, Mich. 
 
 Henry Sewall, M. D., Professor of Physiology, Denver Medical 
 College, Col. 
 
 Edward C. Pickering, Astronomer, Cambridge Observatory : — 
 " Approved (but not if painful) to illustrate known facts." 
 
 With one hundred and fifty-three physicians, and three educators. 
 
EXTRACTS FROM LETTERS. 
 
 Dr. T. Lauder Bruxton, M. D., LL.D., F. R. S., England : — 
 
 " I feel very strongly that, while restriction by law is unadvisable and 
 likely to prove harmful, every operator must be, and ought to be, influenced 
 by public opinion and by his own conscience. I hold that vivisection opera- 
 tions belong to the same category as the use of the whip by coachmen ; and 
 that while any instances of abuse, either of experiments or of the whip by the 
 coachman or car-driver, ought to be taken cognizance of, and if necessary 
 punished, it is as objectionable to limit an experimenter in what he is going 
 to do as it would be to pass a law that no driver of a horse or other animal 
 was to carry a whip or other instrument which could be used for the infliction 
 of pain upon the animal he is driving." 
 
 (The advocates of restriction of vivisection would probably agree with 
 Dr. Brunton that vivisection operations belong to the same category as the 
 use of the whip by coachmen. They would add, however, that just as the 
 law recognizes what is cruelty on the part of the driver, and what may be 
 permissible to him, it should do the same in the case of the physiologist.) 
 
 Sir JoH>r Eric Erichsex, F. R. S., F. R. C. S., etc., Surgeon : — 
 
 " Experiments on living animals are absolutely necessary for the advance- 
 ment of medical surgery and biological science. Such experiments should 
 not be allowed without proper restrictions as a safeguard against their abuse 
 by incompetent persons, or their being performed for futile purposes. Such 
 experiments .should only be performed for purposes of utility, — that is, the 
 advancement of scientific knowledge, — and not for the purpose of acquirins 
 manual dexterity; nor should they be allowed as class demonstrations or for 
 needless repetition. All experiments on living animals, if painful, should be 
 performed under an anresthetic. 
 
 " Experiments on living animals are most carefully restricted in this 
 country. ... I acted as government inspector of- living animals for several 
 years, and I can safely assert that the provisions of the act were vigorously 
 enforced, and never, to my knowledge, contravened."' 
 
 Prof. J. Sully, London, England : — 
 
 " I believe both in the desirability of a certain control of vivisection ex- 
 periments by the feeling of a community, or rather in a free expression of 
 this feeling, and of urging it on legislators and others. At the same time, I 
 think if an ignorant public were to determine when and where such experi- 
 ments are to be carried out, some of the most valuable and useful parts of 
 scientific work would be arrested. It is eminently a case for adjustment 
 between a worthy popular sentiment and the claims of science. How these 
 are both to be satisfied I am not clear, though firmly believing in the 
 desirability." 
 
64 EXTRACTS FROM LETTERS. 
 
 From President Franklix Cakter, LL.D., Williams College, Mass. : 
 
 "The second statement conies nearest to my ojjinion ; but I have no 
 
 behef in the desirableness of the State undertaking the delicate business of 
 
 controlling or directing operations in laboratories. I do not sign the second 
 
 statement, but send you this general reply." 
 
 From Prof. George A. Coe, Ph.D., Professor of Philosophy, North- 
 western University : — 
 
 (Professor Coe objects to signing any of the statements, and adds :) " The 
 outcome of this consideration is not to let things take their course without 
 reference to humanitarian considerations, or rather that humanitarian ethics 
 should be persistently emphasized before all persons concerned, — students, 
 instructors, faculties." 
 
 From James K. Chadwick, M. D., Boston, Mass. : — 
 
 ^' Vivisection is sometimes abused by the infliction of suffering upon the 
 brute creation without corresponding benefit to humanity. These abuses I 
 would like to see stopped. None of your plans seem to me to attain that 
 object without putting objectionable restrictions upon this practice." 
 
 (Dr. Chadwick denies that it is a " common practice " in the United 
 States to subject animals to Corture merely for the purpose of demonstrating 
 well known or accepted facts. The Committee beg to refer him to the 
 earlier editions of Flint'^ Physiology, and to experiments u])on the nervous 
 system there detailed, as having been made " for class demonstrations.") 
 
 From Vincent Y. Bowditch, M. D., Harvard Medical School, 
 Boston, Mass. : — 
 
 " After weighing the matter carefully, I can, I think, conscientiously sign 
 the second statement, ' Vivisection restricted by Utility.' I believe firmly 
 that in the right hands vivisection has been and will be of great use to hu- 
 manity. At the same time, I think that much (1 cannot say from experience 
 how much) has been done that is not really necessary, and this I would have 
 stopped." 
 
 From Kev. F. J. Clare, Phillipsburg, Pa. : — 
 
 " It is questionable whether any prohibitory humane enactments can be 
 fully enforced or will be fully obeyed. Nevertheless, right legislation is 
 helpful and salutary, and should be encouraged." 
 
 T. M. Balliet, j\[. D., Philadelphia, ^enn. : — 
 
 " I have subscribed to vivisection restricted by utility, because I cannot 
 see the advantage in vivisection as class demonstration ; but fishing and gun- 
 ning are recreations infinitely more cruel, and the pain inflicted on lower 
 animals many hundred times larger, than the most unbounded vivisection by 
 scientists." 
 
 From Prof. Earl Barnes, Stanford University, Cal. : — 
 
 " It is almost impossible to formulate a definition to which a thoughtful 
 man can subscribe to-day. If I were to make my own statement, I should say 
 
EXTKAGTS FROM LETTERS. 65 
 
 that vivisection should be allowed where there is hope of discovery of some 
 truth, or demonstration of some hypothesis of value to humanit}-, provided it 
 is conducted by men who are wise and well trained." 
 
 From Ephraim Cutter, M. D., LL.D., New York : — 
 
 " I am in favor of experiments made on criminals sentenced to death 
 justly, for the good of society ; that is, in penal physiology. There is a cry- 
 ing need of the following experiments : (1) Feeding, to prove that tubercu- 
 losis is mainly caused by feeding, — and cured as caused, by feeding. (2) 
 That fatty degeneration is caused and cured by feeding. (3) That throm- 
 bosis is caused and cured by feeding. (4) That cancer is caused and cured 
 by feeding. (5) That all gravelly diseases come from, and can be made cur- 
 able by, feeding. (6) That the noxious properties of common foods be tested 
 on human criminals. (7) That consumption of the bowels be thus proved to 
 come from food. (8) Finally, that worthless and criminal lives thus be made 
 valuable for the good of society. 
 
 •' I am utterly opposed to re-proving by vivisection facts already established. 
 Many lives are now saved in gun-shot wounds of the abdomen because of vivi- 
 sections on dogs, which otherwise would have been lost ; but crime should 
 furnish the materials in most vivisections in the larger sense of the term." 
 
 From Nathan E. Brill, A. M., M. D., Visiting Physician of Mt. 
 Sinai Hospital, ISTew York : — 
 
 " I can only subscribe to statement III. in part,' and to statement IV. (b) in 
 part. I do not believe in the restriction to utility, nor in allowing unrestricted 
 vivisection. We do not produce disease in man for the purpose of producing 
 symptoms and pathological processes of that disease. Who would venture, 
 for example, to inoculate a human being with small-pox for the purpose of 
 showing its symptoms ? Students are ready enough to take the word of the 
 teacher and their books as to the facts of that disease. Nothing of importance 
 is gained by subjecting animals to torture to demonstrate established facts. 
 Such experiments are vranton. The truths of physiological laws should be 
 taught, therefore, in the same way as are the facts of disease. 
 
 " Excepting these limitations, I am of the opinion that further restriction 
 of vivisection would be a hindrance to scientific progress. . . . Vivisection 
 should be taken away from those who use it simply to show generally accepted 
 facts in connection with vital phenomena, because such experiments are useless. 
 It seems to me to be an unjustifiably use of vivisection to apply it, as some phy- 
 siologists do, simply to demonstrate facts which are universally accepted." 
 
 Sir Dyce Duckworth, M. D., LL.D., Honorary Physician to 
 H. R. H. the Prince of Wales : — 
 
 "A measure of State regulation is in my opinion desirable; but senti- 
 mentalists who have no means of forming sound opinions on the problems 
 involved should not influence or bias the legislators. Vivisection should be 
 forbidden to any but skilled teachers." 
 
 George Fleming, C. B., LL.D., Ex-President of the Eoyal College 
 of Veterinary Surgeons, North Devon, England : — 
 
 " T approve of this statement, ' vivisection restricted by utility.' " 
 
 5 
 
66 EXTRACTS FROM LETTERS. 
 
 From Samuel W. Abbott, M. D., M. A., Secretary State Board 
 of Health, Boston, Mass. : — 
 
 " The definition of vivisection is a pretty difficult matter ... I am in 
 favor of its continuance, with such restrictions as shall make it imjoossible to 
 conduct such operations in a cruel or painful manner." 
 
 From Paul Carus, Editor of "The Mouist" and ^'The Open 
 Court": — 
 
 " None of the four statements represents the opinion which I hold. I 
 would formulate my position as favoring vivisection, with moral and without 
 legal restrictions. While I am convinced that vivisection cannot be abolished, 
 I insist upon its being restricted by the moral sentiment of the vivisector and 
 his audience. 
 
 " The fundamental law of morality is not the avoidance of pain, but the 
 intellectual and emotional growth and ex2;)ansion of our souls. . . . Wher- 
 ever you can detect professors and students who with blunted moral senses 
 necessarily and cruelly inflict pain, you should at least call attention to the 
 barbaric methods which they employ, even thougli they be scientists of high 
 repute. To pass new laws will do no good ; but to ventilate the question 
 by public discussion, and help those vivisectionists who do not possess moral 
 restraint to acquire it, will do an immense deal of good." 
 
 From Mary Putnam Jacobi, M. D., Visiting Physician at the 
 New York Infirmary, Graduate from L'.ficole de Medicine, Paris, 
 France, 1871 : — 
 
 "The fourth statement entirely represents my views on this important 
 question, yet leaves something to be added. It is in my opinion ridiculous 
 foV outsiders, necessarily imperfectly acquainted with methods of physio- 
 logical research, to be allowed to prescribe what may or may not be done 
 to demonstrate a proposition or to impart to students a living conception of 
 the phenomena of life. But I think it quite fair that the experimenter 
 should — like the butcher, and more than is at present the case with the 
 hunter — be to a certain extent supervised and expected to reduce to a 
 minimum the suffering inflicted, and to inflict none but what is absolutely 
 necessary to attain his chosen end." 
 
 From Mary A. Mixer, M. D., formerly Professor of Physiology in 
 Northwestern University, Woman's Medical College : — 
 
 ** We consider any attempt to limit vivisection by the amount of pain 
 produced to be entirely impracticable, since we have no means of knowing 
 how much pain an animal suffers compared to a human being." 
 
 From Prof, Abby Leach, Vassar College, N. Y. : — 
 
 " Certainly, students in the laboratory ought to be held in check by their 
 instructors, and it is unwarrantably cruel not to avoid pmn where it is pos- 
 sible. If, however, the search for truth demands pain, then have the pain." 
 
 From Eev. W. F. Mutch, Ph.D., New Haven, Conn. : — 
 
 " With reference to the vivisection question, I am not disposed to sign 
 any of the statements proposed. Doubtless, there are abuses in colleges as 
 
EXTEACTS FKOM LETTERS. 67 
 
 there are in barns; but it is clearly impossible to reach them with law, and 
 it is one of the things which must be entrusted to humanity as it is." 
 
 Prof. Burt G. Wilder, M. D., Professor of Physiology, etc., Cor- 
 nell University, Ithaca, N. Y. : — 
 
 " I cannot sign either of the declarations of your circular. My views and 
 practice are indicated in the enclosed lecture-sheet." 
 
 ■ (Extract.) " From the use of a single word, ' vivisection,' for two widely 
 different things, — painful and painless experimentation, — have resulted 
 much confusion, injustice, and distress of mind. . . . Two kinds of vivisec- 
 tion should be verbally distinguished as sentisection and callisection. . . . 
 Without prejudice to the claim of some that sentisection is demanded for the 
 advancement of knowledge by experts, the writer holds that it is not warranted 
 for the dissemination of knowledge." 
 
 MoNCURE D. Conway, M. A., L.H. D., Author, England: — 
 
 " (1) I do not think that the question turns exclusively on pain ; even with- 
 out pain, destruction of some animals should not be allowed without very great 
 advantage, — for example, monkeys. (2) I do not think vivisection should be 
 allowed for demonstration of facts already discovered. (3) It is doubtful 
 whether, in philosophical research, the zobphili'sts would be competent judges 
 of the offices for which vivisection is justifiable." 
 
 From Rev. Dr. Thomas C. Hall, Chicago, 111. : — 
 
 " I believe the best thing the State could do would be to restrict the right 
 of vivisection to responsible persons, and to control carefully the institutions 
 under whose directions such persons worked." 
 
 From President Gr. Stanley Hall, Clark University : — 
 
 " I hesitate somewhat between statements II. and III. I have no hesita- 
 tion in dissenting from I. and IV. I do not quite wish to put myself on 
 record as agreeing with either of the positions. It is very rarely justifiable 
 to operate for mere demonstration, but I am not ready to see that absolutely 
 forbidden on all animals. I believe most experiments can be made painless, 
 but a few of the cardinal tests cannot ; so that I should not have this abso- 
 lutely forbidden." 
 
 From H. H. A. Beach, M. D., Surgeon, Massachusetts General 
 Hospital : — 
 
 " I am unwilling to sign either of the four statements. Vivisection without 
 restriction I regard as an abomination, and the laws which permit such a 
 practice a blot upon the country that makes them. Vivisection restricted by 
 utility I should sign, but there is no rule for excluding the clause, ' Science 
 must prove that advantage and that necessity.' " 
 
 From Hon. J. S. Willis, M. C. : — 
 
 "It would be unwise and narrow to prohibit vivisection absolutely. It is 
 allowable to mankind under restrictions to investigate all subjects that con- 
 cern the welfare of the huninn familv. . . . Utilitv should be a condition and 
 
68 EXTEACTS FROM LETTEES. 
 
 prerogative of vivisection. The simple play of liuman fancy or curiosity 
 should be discarded in testing and teaching so intricate a subject. 
 
 " There are other fields sufficiently wide and varied iu which science may 
 amuse itself, without attacking the citadel of animal life. 
 
 " It is doubtful if vivisection should be allowed at all, unless it can be per- 
 formed without pain. Science is not warranted to inflict pain upon the basis 
 of mere experiment. Where the use of antesthetics can preclude the occur- 
 rence of pain, experiment for purposes of utility is.allowable. Pain can never 
 be banished from this world, and mankind must suffer its full share ; and it is 
 unphilosophical to add to the horrors of commiseration by uselessly involving 
 the inferior animals in the toils of exaggerated science." 
 
 From Pres. N. H. Chamberlin, A. M., LL.B., McKendrie College, 
 Illinois : • — 
 
 " I should be inclined to strike out in the second paragraph these words, 
 ' but whether any useful knowledge can be acquired or not is beside the 
 question.' I should rest the whole proposition on the moral quality of the 
 act, without any statement of inducement implied in the clause struck out." 
 
 Sir Walter Besant, Author, England : — 
 
 " I am not a scientific man, nor can I test the statements and claims 
 advocated in favor of vivisection ; but to cut and hack living creatures with- 
 out the strongest possible reasons, or to suffer any irresponsible anatomist 
 to do so without the strongest possible expectations, without anaesthetics, is 
 unsjjeakably shocking and horrible.'" 
 
 EicHARD H. HuTTOx, M. A., LL.D., Editor of the "■ Spectator," 
 Loudon, England : — 
 
 " Vivisection should be allowable if without any pain greater than is 
 inflicted in putting to death in a humane fashion. This is the only answer 
 which seems to me maintainable by any one who thinks it right to kill the 
 lower animals for man's benefit; and to this answer I adhere." 
 
 Hon. Area K. Waterman, Illinois Appellate Court, Chicago, 111. : 
 
 " Civilization in its moral aspect consists in a heightened sympathy with 
 
 and consideration for those men or animals in our power. It is impossible to 
 
 train a child to indifference as regards the suffering of a helpless dog, and at 
 
 the same time mindful of the rights of little children. 
 
 " It is immaterial whether he who proposes to torture be an ignorant 
 savage or a distinguished savant. The aim of each is the same. The carter 
 who pounds his horse, the boy who torments a kitten, and the scientist who 
 twists the quivering nerves of a helpless dog are each, in his own way, en- 
 deavoring to promote 'human happiness.' Whoever believes his work to be 
 of supreme importance will naturally become cruel. To whomsoever in the 
 cause of science the agony of a dying rabbit is of no consequence, it is likely 
 that the old or worthless man will soon be a thing which in the cause of learn- 
 ing may well be sacrificed. There is no reason for thinking that Torquemada 
 or Robespierre were naturally any more cruel than the educators who endeavor 
 to add brilliancy and piquancy to their lectures by an exhibition of the manner 
 
EXTEACTS FROM LETTERS. 69 
 
 in which a dumb brute behaves when dissected alive. Vivisection should be 
 permitted only to competent and trustworthy persons, and restricted to 
 licensed places which shall be open at all times to inspection by the Presi- 
 dents of Humane Societies for Protection of Animals, or their authorized 
 representatives. ' ' 
 
 OuiDA, Autlior, Florence, Italy : — 
 
 " Should ever such an opinion as that implied in the statement for vivi- 
 section without restriction become that of. mankind in general, the world will 
 be a hell indeed. The pretensions of what are called scientists are a menace 
 to all liberty, peace, and virtue, and the doctrines thereof followed out from 
 youth to age would make of the earth a shamble." 
 
 From H. R. Brissett, M. D., Lowell, Mass. : — 
 
 " Statements I. and II. I pass over as in nu way tenable. Statement III. 
 contains an " if." Ansesthesia is good while it lasts, but I have often seen it 
 pass off, and the' experimenter go on with the work in hand without renewing 
 it ; and all the class saw with revulsion that there was real torture in the case. 
 So I think absolutely, witii such men as Tait and Bigelow, that vivisection 
 subserves no good purpose, and has only theory (vague at that) to support it." 
 
 From Clayton L. Hill, M. D., Buffalo, N. Y. : — 
 
 " I know from personal experience that medical and surgical research 
 does not demand the fearful suffering and waste of life that is entailed upon 
 the lower animals. I have seen many hundreds of vivisections, and not one 
 of them develojied a new truth or an idea not already well established. 
 Vivisection as practised in medical schools is simply a sort of theatrical per- 
 formance for the benefit of the students and the glory of the professors." 
 
 From John C. Du Bois, A. M., M. D., Late Surgeon in the U. S. 
 Army : — 
 
 " During three years of student life in Paris, I saw a good deal of torture 
 to animals in unnecessary demonstrations to students of well-known facts, 
 and I heard stories of Magendie's cruelties. A good deal of sentimental 
 nonsense has been written and spoken upon vivisection ; yet there have been 
 abuses, and the benefits such experiments have conferred do not palliate 
 them. 1 am anxious for a proper and legal settlement of this subject." 
 
 From LuiGi Galvani Doane, M. D., New York City : — 
 
 " Put me down as the antagonist of vivisection in any form. The office 
 of the physician is to heal wounds and to save life, not to take it." 
 
 From George H. Payne, M. D., Boston, Mass. : — 
 
 " I believe fully that we have no right to torture God's dumb creatures, 
 and that it does little or no good to experiment upon animals." 
 
 J. W. Thomson, M. D., New York City : — 
 
 " We do not believe that vivisection ever gave knowledge that led to the 
 relief of a single htiman being from jiain, or in any way helped to ameliorate 
 human suffering. This diabolical practice is totally needless as well as das- 
 
70 EXTRACTS FKOM LETTERS. 
 
 tardly inhuman. No man who has been guilty of vivisection ought to be 
 allowed to practise as a physician. Imagine any one coming from a torture- 
 chamber to see a sick child, or to have a mission to help suffering humanity ! 
 How can one who is callous to animal suffering yearn to help his fellow-man ? 
 What can be learned from the quivering, writhing flesh for intelligent guid- 
 ance for the sick? Do the tissues, laid open by the lance, display normal 
 function? Assuredly not. What is the story that a humane mind would read? 
 The only true one of which we can conceive is the palpitating plea for mercy, 
 unheeded by the inhuman wretch who, in the name of a false science, gloats 
 like a ghoul over his fiendish, bloody work." 
 
 From James P. Hawes, M. D., North Hector, N. Y. : — 
 
 "... I have seen dogs kept howling and starving, with large doses of 
 chloral injected in one side and strychnine in the other side; some lived 
 and some died. What did it prove ? In one of our leading colleges, I have 
 seen a calf split open and a little flag-staff stuck in the heart for the edifica- 
 tion of the students ! What did that prove of the human heart ? Enough 
 accidents happen to poor humanity to test the results of pain and wounds, 
 burns and scalds, freezing and anaesthesia, without infliction on the poor 
 brute." 
 
 From A. Eose, M. D., New York: — 
 
 " There can be no nobler cause than the prevention of cruelty to animals 
 in vivisection. During the Middle Ages tortures were inflicted under the 
 very eyes and strict supervision of awfully learned physicians, and thus we 
 see that learning does not prevent us from doing cruelty. We have to be 
 reminded of this example." 
 
 ' Chakles W. Super, President of Ohio University: — 
 
 " While I am not quite ready to say that vivisection should be entirely 
 prohibited, I am very strongly inclined to this opinion ; but I am entirely ready 
 to sav that scientific research ought not to be free and untrammelled. The 
 humanitarian interests of the world are paramount to any and every other. 
 Scientific investigators sometimes become veritable monomaniacs in their 
 search for knowledge, and as indifferent to the highest interests of their fellow- 
 men as other lunatics. If under the ' untrammelled-research ' re'gime, my 
 neighbor seems to be a better subject for investigation than his dog, I ought 
 as a matter of consistency to experiment on the man father than the brute. 
 It is not hard to see whither such consistency would lead. I am glad to see 
 that the vigorous agitation of this subject is leading to what I consider whole- 
 some legislation." 
 
 Hon. EowLAi^D B. Ma h any, M. C. : — 
 
 " Enough cruelty is already being practised upon dumb animals without 
 legalizing what at best may be termed 'experimental torture.' . . . Even 
 under the scalpel of the ablest operator, it is a grave question of doubt 
 . whether any permanent benefit to science is acquired by the process of vivi- 
 section." 
 
EXTRACTS FROM LETTERS. 71 
 
 Right Rev. Geokge F. Seymour, LL.l)., lUshop of Springfield : 
 
 " I consider that the animated woi'ld beneath man is a sacred trust com- 
 mitted to liim by the Creator, and for the right and just administration of 
 wliicli lie will be held sternly accountable. Hence, I would jjlace very severe 
 restrictions upon vivisection, and allow ils practice only in cases where it 
 was employed for settling cpiestions which we have good reason to believe 
 could not be answered except by such experiments. I would exclude abso- 
 lutely, and forbid under penalty by law, all exliibitions to students of vivi- 
 section as illustrating ascertained and recorded facts of science." 
 
 From President W. P. John'ston, Geneva College, Pa. : — 
 
 " My opposition to vivisection is not so much because of the pain to the 
 animal dissected (it dies in a little while), but because of injury to the moral 
 nature of the animal dissecting, that lives probably for many years, and has 
 o^Aer chances on other animals than dogs and cats! " 
 
 From John H. Keyser, Hartford, Conn.: — 
 
 " I was superintendent of 'the Stranger's Hospital in Xew York at a time 
 when vivisection was freely practised upon animals by young student phy- 
 sicians. From that experience I formed the opinion that it was wicked, 
 wanton, and cruel to clothe these young and inexj^erienced men with des- 
 potic power over animals, and I forbade the practice. Mercy towards the 
 helpless brute creation is, in my judgment, ample argument against vivisecr 
 tion, and it ought to cease." 
 
 From JonxBoARDMAx, M. D., Buffalo, jST. Y. : — 
 
 "I do not believe that any real good comes to the ordinary student from 
 class vivisection. On the other hand, in my opinion, the humane part of man 
 is injured and the diabolical part comes nearer to the surface." 
 
 From Thomas B. Fowler, M. D., Cohocton, N. Y, : — 
 
 "I do not think the impression left on the. mind of the average medical 
 student as a result of witnessing the mutilation of animals is one that really 
 adds to his available store of knowledge, or tends to aid him in prescribing 
 for suffering humanity. It is impossible to estimate the baneful effects of 
 such experiences on the minds of men whose actions are largely governed by 
 impulse or propensity." 
 
 Note. — The Committee greatly regret that considerations of space prevent fur- 
 ther quotations from the luimerous letters received. It is possible that many of them 
 may be hereafter printed in another form. 
 
I