COLUMBIA LIBRARIES OFFSITE HEALTH SCIENCES STANDARD HX64099636 QP45.L524 1896 Does science need se RECAP ♦••Dees science need secrecy? QPU5 L52i4 1596 mtl)eCtJpotllr»g0rk CoUegc of ^fjpsiicianjs! anb burgeons; ILibvavp Digitized by tine Internet Arcliive in 2010 witli funding from Open Knowledge Commons (for the Medical Heritage Library project) http://www.archive.org/details/doesscienceneedsOOIeff FIFTH TBOUSAKb. jDoes Science need Secrecy? A REPLY TO PROF. PORTER AND OTHERS OF HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL. ALBERT LEFFINGWELL, M. D., CAMBRIDGE, MASS. WITH STATEMENT CONCERNING VIVISECTION BY PROF. W. T. PORTER, REPRINTED FROM THE " BOSTON TRANSCRIPT." PRO\^DENCE, R. I. 1896. pa sf . DOES SCIENCE NEED SECRECY? j A REPLY TO PROFESSOR PORTER BY ALBERT LEFFINGWELL, M. D. , M. Sc. Formerly Instructor in Physiology, Poh-technic Institute, Brooklyn, N. Y. To what extent cau scientific authority be implicitly re- ceived as the foundation of belief regarding the subject of Vivisection? It is certain that for the gi'eat majority of men and women, all statements concerning it are wholly beyond the possibility of verification by personal experi- ence. Regarding its extent or its methods, its pain or pain- lessness, its utility to humanity or its liability to abuse, the world bases its judgment, not upon knowledge, but upon faith in the accuracy, the impartiality, the sincerity of the men who, standing within the temple of science, know with certainty the facts. One might suppose that here was the welcome opportunit}'^ to demonstrate that science can have nothing to conceal ; that her symbol is a torch and not a veil; and that above all professional preference and all partisan zeal stands fidelity to accuracy, and the love of absolute truth. Nevertheless, it is my purpose in this paper to question the wisdom of too implicit faith ; to suggest the expediency of doubt ; and to point out why statements which may have the support of high scientific authorities, should sometimes be received with great caution and careful discrimination. And yet I cannot see the slightest reason why everything that concerns a scientific method or purpose should not be plainly and accurately set forth. Generally The substance of this article was read before the Annual Meeting of the American Humane Association, Minneapolis, September 26, 1895, and was printed in the Boston Transcript, September 28, 1895. this is the case. If a now telescope of miusiial jiower is desired by a university^, "Wealth is not asked to give it in order that wealth may be increased by lunar dis- coveries. When an astronomical station is established on the Andes, or an expedition fitted out for the North Pole, we all know that science only wall be the gainer — not com- merce or art. The one exception to an almost universal rule, the one point where truth is veiled in obscurity for the public eye, is when we come to the vivisection of animals. Everywhere else science seems mindful of her mission, and asks only that with increasing radiance the light may shine. Why should vivisection offer an exception to this ideal ? That it seems impossible to tell the whole truth about it is evident to every person who undei-stands the facts. The London Lancet^ for exampl'e, recently praised a biography by Prof. Mosso, in which that Italian physiologist — as the Lancet remarked, '•'■visely" said, — "It is an error to be- lieve that experiments can be performed on an animal w^hich feels." A few weeks ago Professor Mosso sent me a manuscript copy of this same essay, in which the sentence appears in slightly different form : " It is an error to think that one can experiment on animals that have not lost sen- sation ; the disturbance produced by pain in the organism of the animal is so great that it renders useless any obser- vations." Now here is the utterance of a man of science, trained in the accuracy of the laboratory, occupying one of the foremost positions in Europe as a physiologist, and his words, stamped with the approval of the leading Medical journal of England, may presently be floating through the American press. How is the average reader to question a statement like this? Nevertheless, it is ab- solutely untrue. One can perform experiments "on an animal which feels ; " they have been done by the thousand b}' Bernard, Magendie, Mantagazza, Brown-Sequard, and others ; I have seen scores of these myself. No more un- scientific sentence was ever written than this statement that one cannot do what is done every day ! What the Ital- ian physiologist might truthfully have wi'itten was this : " It is ail error to believe that physiological experiments, re- (puring the aid of delicate iustrumeuts, can be performed up- on an animal -which is not made incapable of muscular effort." If he had then gone on to say to what extent he effects this b}" means of anaesthetics, to what extent by the use of narcotics, and to what extent the poison of curare is administei-ed to paralyze the motor nerves, leaving sensibil- itv to pain untouched, we might have had a scientific state- ment of fact. As it is, we have — what? An untruth due to ignorance? An error due to carelessness? I do not know. Perhaps the physiologist was thinking too intently of his own special lines of inquiry to note the significance of his words ; but what shall we say of a great scientific jour- nal in England which could quote the untruth as '■^loisely" said? Is even verbal inaccuracy "wise" w^here science is concerned ? There was recently given out by Dr. William Townsend Porter, the assistant professor of physiology in Harvard Medical School at Boston, one of the most astonishing state- ments concerning vivisection that ever appeared in public print. The accuracy of Dr. Porter's statement was vouched for by five other leading professors in the same institution — - Drs. Henry P. Bowditch, W. T. Councilman, W. F. Whit- ney, C. S. Minot and H. C. Ernst ; men whose scientific rep- utation has imparted to their affirmations an immense authority throughout the country. They put forth what they asserted was a " plain statement of the whole truth " con- cerning experiments on living animals. He, perhaps, is a rash man who ventures to question any assertion supported by names like these. But it is the duty of every lover of scientific truth to point out errors wherever he may^ find them, no matter how shielded by authority or intrenched by public opinion ; and I propose, therefore, to make use of this pro- fessional manifesto as an illustration of the fallibility of even the highest scientific expert testimony. I think it can be proven that although this declaration rests on such high au- thority, it is nevertheless permeated with mis-statement and error ; that certain assertions have been made without due authority, aud certain facts of pith and moment most singu- larly omitted, or most carelessly overlooked. And if full reliance cannot be given to assertions made by men of the highest fame, then the whole question is as far as ever from permanent settlement. 1. In the first place Professor Porter does not W(>11 wlicn he denies (as he seems to do) that the practice of experi- mentation upon living animals has ever led to abuse. ' ' The cruelties practiced by vivisectors are paraded in long lists, with the assurance that they are taken directly from the ])ublished writings of the vivisectors themselves." Well, is this assurance untrue? "These long-drawn lists of atrocities that never existed," — can these be the words of a devotee of scientific truth? What does Professor Porter mean by them? What othe*- meaning is possible for the averao;e reader to obtain than that he intended to deny that atrocious experiments were anything but a myth? " Never existed ? " AVhy , both in Europe and America, but especially abroad, I have personally seen most awful cruelty inflicted upon living animals, simply for the purpose of illustrating well-known facts or theories that had not the faintest con- ceivable relation to the treatment and cure of disease. No facts of history are cai)able of more certain verification than the tortures which have marked the vivisections of Magendie and Bernard, of Bert and Mantagazza, and of a host of their imitators. " It is not to be doubted that in- humanity may be found in persons of very high position as physiologists; we have seen that it was so in Magendie." This is the language of the report on vivisection by a royal commission, to Avhich is attached the name of Professor Thomas H. Huxley. Says Dr. Eliotsou, in his work on Himian Physiology (p. 448), "I cannot refrain from ex- pressing my horror at the amount of torture which Dr. Brachet inflicted. / luirdhi think Tcnowledqe is loorth having at such a purchase:' But take American testimony on this point. Dr. Henry J. Bigelow, for many years the professoi- of surgery in Harvard Medical School, of whom Dr. Oliver Wendell Holmes has said, that he M^as " one of the first, if not the first, of American surgeons," gave the annual address before the Massachusetts Medical Society a few years ago. Therein he called attention to the "dreadful sufferings of dumb animals, the cold-blooded cruelties now more and more practiced under the authority of science ! . . . Watch the students at a vivisection. It is the blood and suffering, not the science that rivets their breathless attention. . . It is dreadful to think how many poor animals will be sulj- jected to excruciating agony as one medical college after another becomes penetrated with the idea that vivisection is a part of modern teaching ; that to hold way with other in- stitutions they, too, must have their vivisector, their muti- lated dogs, their chamber of horrors and torture to advertise as a laboratory." Does any one imagine that Dr. Bigelow here refers to ' ' atrocities that never existed ? " The American Academy of Medicine includes within its membership men who are as well informed as any in the medical profession. At the sixteenth annual meeting, held in Washington four years ago. Dr. Theophilus Par^'in, one of the professors in Jefferson Medical College of Phila- delphia, gave the Presidential address. Speaking of physi- ologists, he says that there are some "who seem, seeking useless knowledge ^ to be blind to the writhing agony and deaf to the cry of pain of their victims, and who have been guilty of the most damnable cruelties without the denunci- ation by the public that their wickedness deserves and de- mands ; these criminals are not confined to Germany or France, hut may he found in our own countrij." Is this the statement of an " agitator?" Well, President Parvin gradu- ated as a physician some years before Dr. Porter was born, and I fancy that he knows of what he speaks. And that physiological experimenter who, defending the utility of vi\i.section, forgets or denies the existence of atrocity, may be on dangerous ground. Cases have been known where merciless occupation has induced an atrophy of the sense of pity ; and its first symptom is unconsciousness of cruelty, and blindness to abuse. II. But quite as strange as any assertion in this 8 " |)hun statemeut of tlic whole triilli" is the implied sugges- tion that abuse is impossible because everything is so openly (lone ! " These loud outcries to put an end to the frightful scenes daily enacted within the open doors of the most enlightened institutions of learning," — surely there is a false impression conveyed by those words which their writer should hasten to correct. ' ' Within the open doors ! " To whom are the doors of the physiological laboratories open ? Why, no feudal castle of the middle ages was ever more rigidly guarded against the entrance of an enemy than physio- logical laboratories are secured against the admission of un- welcome visitors. To some of the largest laboratories in the United States, no physician even, can gain entrance unless personally known. If the Bisiiop of Massachusetts and the editor of any leading newspaper in the city were to apply for admittance at Professor Porter's laboratory during a vivisection, would tiie doors swing open as to welcome guests ? Would they be invited to come again and as often as desired, without previous notification? I commend the experiment. Of course a certain degree of this seclusion is necessary and wise. That which I criticise is the implied denial that any secrecy exists and this reference to " open doors." And if doubt still lingers in the minds of any who read, a conclusive experiment will not be difficult to make. Let him but knock at these ' ' open doors " when vivisection is going on. III. We are informed, too, by these scientific autho- rities that by so simple a method as "a scratch on the tail of an etherized mouse" and sul)sequent treatment, "the priceless discovery was made which has at length banished tetjanus from the list of incurable disorders." That is an unscientific statement simply because it is untrue. Tetanus, or lockjaw, was never in "the list of incurable disorders" — if uniform fatalit}' is meant ; and it certainly has not been taken out of the list by any "priceless discovery" whatever. Consult Aikin, AVood, Fagge, Gross — consult any medical authority whatever of ten years ago — and you find the recoveries from tetanus averaged at that time from ten to fifty-eight per cent, of those who were attacked. Now, what mighty change has been wrought by the " price- less discovery ? " Well, I take up the London Lancet of Aug. 10, 1895, and I find an English physician tracing " all procurable published and unpublished cases of tetanuh^ treated b}' anti-toxine," and they number just thirt3^-eight, of which twenty-five were recoveries and thirteen were deaths. I take up the New York Medical Record for Aug. 24, 1895, and I find a correspondent stating that he " can discover in the recent medical literature but six or seven cases in all where auti-tosine or tetauine has been used successfully, and they were all by foreigners." To call that a "priceless discovery," which is not in general use to-day, which in four years has made no better record than this, and with which the report of hardly a single cure can be found in American medical annals within the last five years, — \s that & scientific statement? Is it worthy of the reputation of meu who allowed it to go forth to the world backed by the eminence of their names ? IV. " It is asserted," says Professor Porter, "that living animals, without narcotics, helpless under the control of poisons which, it is alleged, destroy the power to move while increasing the power to suffer, are subjected to long, agonizing operations, in the hope of securing some new ^act, interesting to the scientific mind, but without practical value." This is one of the most curious and ingenious sentences I have ever read. Its inaccuracy depends on only two words, "without narcotics." No critic of vivisection ever made use of those words in any such statement ; and I respectfully challenge Professor Porter for reference or quotation. It cannot be given. But, if instead of the words "without narcotics," Professor Porter had written "without anaesthetics," then he would have made a precise, accurate and true statement of what undoubtedly has been charged. Could an}'^ reader imagine that such a charge was true, and that it mio-ht exactly apply to some operations carried on in the labora- tories of Harvard Medical School ? ' ' Helpless under the 10 control of poisons Avliidi dc^stiov the powei' 1o inov»\ wliilo inoieasinu; the power to siitfor," writ«'s tlu' pliysiolo>pired through the natural channel. ..." The cat to be experi- mented upon was first etherized by being placed in a bell- glass with a sponge saturated with ether, and then secured, " the head being held in an ordinary Czermak's rabbit- holder. The sciatic nerve was then divided. In some cases the cat was allowed to recover from the effect of the ether, and the experiment postponed some days ; in others, a half- per-cent solution of curare was put into the circulation while the animal was still etherized." (The effect of the curare would be to render the animal motionless, after recovery from the ether ; it has no other use.) In all, there were 909 obsel•^•ations made upon " about seventy cats."* In one ex- periment " a tetanic stimulation was applied for fifteen min- utes to the sciatic nerve. The result was a constriction steadily maintained during continuance of the irritation." If there were an^' results for ''benefit of humanity " in these investigations, they are not recorded. These experiments were made at Harvard ]Medical .School ; and I submit that they were by no means " painless." 7. Dr. Bowditch's Experiments on Nerves. These were made u^wn cats "in the laboratory of Harvard Medical School." "The animals were kept under tlie * In the Boston Transcript of Feb. 10, 1896, the Dean of Harvard Medical School was reported as denying that cats were used for vivisection, and as affirming that although connected with the School since his graduation he had "never seen or heard of a cat being in the building." It is indeed strange that the fame of Dr. Bowditch's researches upon these " seventy cats " did not even reach his associate in the same building! 17 influence of a dose of curare just strong enough to prevent muscular contractions ; while artificial respiration was maintained, and the sciatic nerve constantly subjected to stimulation sufficiently intense to produce in unpoisoned animals, a tetanic contraction of the muscles. In this way it was found that stimulation of a nerve lasting from one a half to four hours (the muscle being prevented from contracting by curare) did not exhaust the nerve." The foregoing quotation is from an address given before the American Association for. Advancement of Science, August, 1886 — nine years ago. If any great "benefit to hu- manity" has resulted from them, it has not yet been made public. Were these experiments "painless?" 8. Dr. Erxst's Eesearches into Rabies. In the " American Journal of Medical Sciences" for April, 1887, there appears an account of certain investigations into the nature of rabies and hydrophobia, made by Dr. Harold C. Ernst of the Harvard Medical School. Some thirty- two rabbits were inoculated with rabies, and all of them died of this terrible disease. Without touching upon the question of utility in this particular instance, I submit that by his own account of these investigations, they were by no means " painless." 9. Experiments of Prof. Porter on the Spinal Cord. In the " Journal of Physiology" for April 6, 1895, appears a long and elaborate article on the "Path of the Respiratory Impulses," by Professor William Townsend Porter, of the Laboratory of Physiology in the Hai-vard Medical School, the author of the preceding manifesto. Taken in conjunction with his assertion regarding painful vivisections that "none such have been made in Harvard Medical School within our knowledge," this paper would seem to offer a very curious and significant illustration of scientific forgetfulness. The object of Professor Porter's experiments was the confirmation of a pui'ely physiological hypothesis ; one which had no reference whatever to the cure or treatment of human ills. His researches embraced 9.t least sixty-eight experiments, and full details of fifteen 18 are giveu in this essay. In seven of these fifteen exi)oii- ments — all involving most painful mntilations — light doses of morphia or chloral were administered instead of aniesthetics ; in one experiment the dose is not given, and in another there is no mention of any " narcotic " of any kind. Even when ether was given, it was not as a rnh^ used throughout the experiment. Some examples will he of interest ; the italics are mine. '' I have separated the cord from the l)ullt in eight rabbits and six dogs, all fully grown. . . . Artificial respiration was kept np a long time. . . . The animals were all yer// lightly narcotized.'" Exp. 1. Dec. 19, 1«1)3. "The fourth ventricle was laid bare in a large, lightly chloralized rabbit, and the floor of the left side of the medium line burned away with small hot glass beads. Respiration continued on both sides in spite of repeated cauterizations." Exp. II. Dec. 15, 1893. "Most of the left side of the tloor of the left ventricle of a rabbit, lightly chloralized, (not over 0.1 g.), was burned awa}'." {This ^cas one- tenth the usual dose of chloral.) Exp. XXIII. Feb. 27, 1894. Dog narcotized with morphia. Cer\acal cord exposed its entire length ; severed at the sixth cer^^cal vertebra, and the posterior roots of the cer\'ical nerves cut. (An exceedingly painful ex- periment.) Exp. LXVI. Nov. 20, 1894. Rabbit, '' lightly nar- cotized with ether." Left phrenic nerve " was seized near the first rib and torn out of the chest." . . . "I have made such experiments on thirteen rabbits and one dog, and the result has ulicays been the same." A beautiful engraving gives the respiratory curve of this rabbit, "the left phrenic nerve of which had been torn out. . . . The stars denote struggling." Exp. LI. May 3, 1894. "At 10.30 a middle-sized dog received 0.2 g. morphia. Half an hour later, the left half of the spinal cord was severed. . . . Animal being loosed, showed a paralysis on the left side. ... At 19 4.30 the clog was bouncl again and the abdomen opened," Why was the dog "bound again?" No mention of "narcotic" or anaesthetic during further steps of the experiment. Exp. XXV. Mar. 3, 1894. Dog; given 0.15 grammes morphia sulphate ; tracheotomized, spinal cord severed at sixth cervical vertebra ; artificial respiration. Exp. XLIX. May 1, 1894. "At 10 A. M. the left side of the spinal cord of a rabbit, narcotized with ether, was cut. . . . At^4 P. M., 5^ hours after, breathing was bilateral. . . . On opening the abdomen . . . diaphragm was once more exposed and cut in two pieces." . . . (No mention of anaesthetic or narcotic during latter half of experiment, " 5^ hours later.") Exp. LII. May 4, 1894. Spinal cord of rabbit narcotized with ether, cut on left side. . . . Seven hours later he was in good condition and kicked vigorously as he teas again jiut on the board. The abdomen opened in the median line . . . phrenic nerve was now cut, etc." There is no mention of narcotic or anaesthetic during the latter part of the operation, " seven hours later" when the rabbit " was again put on the board," kicking vigorously, to have its abdomen opened. Exp. LVI. May 14, 1894. Rabbit, etherized and tracheotomized. Spinal cord cut ; artificial respiration ; "The narcotic was stopped. On turning the rabbit and opening the abdomen," etc. Why was not the abdomen opened before ' ' the narcotic was stopped ? " Exp. LXI. Nov. 8, 1894. The right half of the spinal cord of a full-grown rabbit was severed . . . the phrenic nerve cut . . . artificial respiration, etc." There is no mention whatever of either narcotic or anaesthetic being used in this experiment. "Other experiments could be added, but they seem unnecessary," says Professor Porter. We agree with him. There are few laboratories in Europe better equipped for vivisection than the scene of all these experiments. In one of his works, Dr, Ott pays a tribute to the inventive genius 20 of Prof. ITfiiiy P. Bowditch of Ilnrvard .Modioal School, who, it seems, has contrived a new de\'iee for holding ininiov- alily the head of an animal to be vivisected. " It consists of a fork-shai)ed iron instrument, the points of the fork united by an iron bar , . . which is passed behind the canines (teeth) and bound fast by a strong cord which is fastened over the jaws. When the iron rod is fastened to the prongs, the handle is inserted into the screw-sliding points of the upright rod of a Bernard holder," in which device certain straps prevent the dog " from retracting his nose." But how can a dog retract his nose if insensil)le? Wh}' should he wish to retract his nose if he is suffering nothing? "I sometimes fear," said Dr. Thcophilus Parvin in his address before the A«nerican Academy of Medicine, "that this anaesthesia is frequently nominal rather than real ; else why so many ingenious contrivances for confining the animal during operations, contrivances that are not made use of in surgical operations upon human beings ? " These were Boston vivisections. They were not done thousands of miles away in some distant European laboratory, but here at home. Should they have been left in the quiet secrecy of phj'siological literature? Then assuredly their existence ought not to have been explicitly denied. What judgment are we entitled to pass upon this mani- festo? Was it, indeed, what it claimed to be — "a plain statement of the whole truth ? " No. A " statement of the whole truth " would not have carefully mentioned "a scratch of the tail of an etherized mouse," and made no reference to other investigations of infinitely greater import carried on in their own laboratory. A statement of the whole truth would not have spoken of " long-drawn lists of atrocities that never existed" — deny- ing in one sweeping sentence some facts as certain as any in history. A statement of the whole truth would not have referred to ' ' narcotics " as though they were identical with ' ' anaesthetics ; " it would not have left hidden the use and purpose of curare; it would not have referred to "open doors," when there are no open doors ; it would not hav^ 21 proclaimed to the public as a "priceless discover}^" for the cure of tenanus, an agent of which not five cases of successful employment in this country can be found in med- ical literature. And above all, a plain statement of the whole truth would never have declared that no painful vivisection had been made in Harvard Medical School "within our knowledge," in the face of the evidence I have given in this paper. I am not an anti-vivisectionist, for I believe in the practice, when it is rigidly- guarded against all abuses, limited to useful ends, and subject to public criticism and the super- vision of the law. But I cannot believe that science ever advances by equivocation or gains by secrecy. If, in the opinion of scientific experts, certain phases of vivisec- tion can only go on by being concealed and kept from the world's judgment and criticism, then I fear the time may come when society will question the expediency of all such methods, not because they are invariably useless, not because they are always cruel, but from higher considerations than those that affect man's relations to the animal world. For science can exist without more vivisection ; but there are some things -without which society itself cannot exist. (From the Boston Ei'cniiti^ Traiiscripi^ ynh' ^J> ^Scpj.) CONCERNING VIVISECTION. BY WILLIAM TOWNSEND PORTER, M.D., Ass't Professor of Physiology, Harvard Medical School. [The following statement is made at the suggestion of Dr. H. P. BowDiTCH, Dr. W. T. Councilman, Dr. W. F. Whitney, Dr. C. S. Minot AND Dr. H. C. ERN8T, PROFESSORS IN THE HARVARI> MEDICAL SCHOOL, IN ANSWER TO MANY REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION WITH REGARD TO EXPERI- MENTATION ON LIVING ANIMALS.] ' Keaders of the dally prints are aware that a few misinformed indi- viduals are making a persistent effort to bring about a popular agitation against the experimentation on living animals. The newspaper letters and Other communications put forth by these persons dispute the neces- sity of vivisection, aflJrming that the knowledge secured by this means is not essential to the progress of biologj', and therefore without substan- tial value for medicine, a department of general biology on which the public welfare and the happiness and prosperity of every citizen depend. It is charged that experimental studies of the functions of living animals have no purpose save the gratification of an ignoble ambition, or the satisfaction of an idle and vicious curiosity. It is asserted that living animals, without narcotics, helpless under the control of poisons which, it is alleged, destroy the power to move while increasing the power to suffer, are subjected to long, agonizing operations In the hope of securing some new fact, interesting to the scientific mind but without practical value. The cruelties practiced by vivisectors are paraded in long lists, with the assurance that they are taken directly from the pub- lished writings of the vivisectors themselves, and distressing pictures are drawn of the work of eminent professors in great universities. In short, an organized effort is making to persuade the uninformed that men who spend their lives in laying the broad and deep foundations on which alone a rational medicine can rest are wanting in common human- ity, and that the medical profession, whose work it is to lessen the suf- fering in the world, looks with indifference on useless and truly revolting cruelties done before its very eyes.* It is true that the evident exaggeration of these charges will alone discredit them with manj' who have no special knowledge of the pro- cedures so fiercely attacked, and who therefore cannot perceive that the weapons of these agitators are garbled facts, downright perversions, and mix- leading excerpts from professional writings beyond the comprehension of the untrained. It is true that the public mind will hardly be persuaded *The italics in this paper are not in the original. They are herein employed not for emphasis, but merely to indicate certain inaccurate affirmations or suggestions, to which the especial attention of the reader is directed. 23 that teachers in medicine have less mercy towanls dumb animals than men of other callings. And yet these reiterated charges of cruelty, these long draiun lists of atrocities that never existed, these loud outcries to put an end to the ffight/ul scenes daily enacted ivitbin the open doors of the most enlightened seats of learning, Sihsurd though they be, do positive harm. The least of the evil that they do is that they publicly attack the char- acter of investigators and teachers in the medical profession; the great- est, that they seek to destroy the freedom of learning, and to make impossible that patient search for fundamental truths which has raised medicines from the slough of empiricism to the level of an applied science. It is the duty of medical men to meet these mischievous attacks by A PLAIN STATEMENT OF THE WHOLE TRUTH. Experiments on living animals may be divided into three classes. In the first class may be placed those experiments in which the animal is narcotized before the operation Is begun and is killed while still insen- sible to pain. This class includes almost all vivisections in physiology, i. e., almost all experiments which determine directly the functions of living organs, and almost all pharmacological experiments, those which determine the action of remedies on living organs. An example is the cutting of the pneumogastric nerve in the rabbit, fully narcotized with chloral, in order that the action of this nerve upon the respiration raay be studied. The second class consists of experiments in which the operation is made during full unconsciousness and the animal then allowed to re- cover. The following illustrations will make plain the purpose of such work. In a narcotized dog an opening is made through the abdominal walls into the stomach and a short silver tube inserted. The narcotic is stopped. In a few days the wound heals completely. The pain of the wound is usually so slight that even the appetite of the dog is not affect- ed. Very exceptionally the wound takes an unfavorable course. In such cases, the dog, if seen to be suffering, is killed. This opening into the stomach enables the physiologist to determine with much accuracy the digestibility of foods, the nature and the amount of absorption from the stomach, the length of time that food remains in this organ, the effect of remedies upon its functions, and many other matters of the first importance. A second illustration is found in the experiments of the pathologist. A narcotized rabbit is inoculated with the virus of hydrophobia and the symptoms of the disease thus induced are carefully noted. The knowledge thus secured enables the pathologist to decide whether a dog which has been killed after biting several persons in a paroxysm of supposed madness was really rabid. If the dog was mad indeed, the inoculation of an animal with a small portion of the dog's spinal cord brings on the previously determined characteristic symp- toms of the disease. The fact of rabies is thus made certain, and there is still time, so slowly does the rabies develop in the human species, to save the lives of the bitten persons by inoculation with the attenuated virus. Yet another illustration. The bacteriologist makes a scratch in the tail of an etherized mouse, touches the scratch with a wire covered with the germs of tetanus (lockjaw), and learns the course of the disease in this animal. He then endeavors, by the injection of various substances, to arrest the fatal march of the disease. It was in this way that the pWce- less discovery was made which has at length banished tetanus from the list of in- curable disorders. The third class of vivisections is that in which no narcotic is given. Many operations require no auEesthetic because they inflict little or no pain. An example is the injection of diphtheria toxine into horses, in order that the serum of their blood may be used to destroy the diph- u theria bacillus in tbe very tissues of the sick. Other operations of this c\&9S do cause pain. Painful vivisections, when made at all, are made for the sake of determining functions that are temporarily suspended by narcotics. Here truth is gained at the expense of suffering because there is no other way. Such itirestigations are rare. Xone such, have been made in the Harvard Medical School toithin our knotcledge. We cannot believe that such inquiries are ever undertaken in any university without the most careful consideration of their probable value and the conviction thattbe benefit to humanity will far outweigh whatever suffering they may cause to the animals employed. It Is asserted that vivisection is not necessary. This we deny. Vivi- section is the unavoidable consequence of two incontrovertible proposi- tions: the flrst, that there can be no adequate knowledge of the whole without adequate knowledge of the parts which compose the whole; the second, that the functions of the complex organs which compose the higher vertebrate, cannot be clearly made out by the study of dead organs or by the observation of the non-vivi- sected animal. It would be easier to create the science of strategy from observations on dead soldiers than to reproduce the present knowledge concerning the circulation of the blood from a study of the dead blood- vessels. Whole series of phenomena are hidden alike from the student of lifeless tissues and from the outside investigator who confines him- self to man or the non-vivisected animal. Thus, the work done by every organ in the body depends on the quantity of blood with which it is sup- plied, and this depends, other things being equal, on the pressure of the blood within the arteries. No means exist of measuring accurately the pressure of the blood in men or non-vivisected animals. Only when the measuring apparatus is connected directly with the blood-vessels of the living animal can any certain knowledge concerning one of the most important factors in the life of the organism be secured. So the funda- mental problem of the distribution of the blood can be solved only by vivisection. Instances of the practical value of the knowledge gained by vivi- section are almost numberless. The discovery of the restraining action of the pneumogastric nerve upon the heart disclosed a previously un- suspected attribute of nervous tissue, threw a searching light far into the gloom and still enshrouds the higher functions of the brain, and left an ineffaceable mark on practical medicine. This discovery was solely the fruit of vivisection. It is now but twenty-live years since the physiologist Hitzlg stimulated certain areas on the exposed brain of a narcotized dog and observed that each stimulus caused a particular group of muscles to contract. This experiment has given a mighty impulse to the diagnosis of cerebral disease, has opened the almost superstitiously dreaded brain to the surgeon's knife, and has rescued many who once were thought beyond the reach of art.* *The latest statistics regarding brain-Surgery are of interest to the medical profession. In an address before the New York State Medical Society, January !i9, 1896, Dr. M. Allen Starr gives the results of operations for brain tumor so far as recorded in the medical literature of this country and Europe up to January 1, 1896. There have been, it seems, 16"- cases operated upon, in 72 of which the tumor was removed, and the patient recovered. In 90 other cases the tumor was either not found or the operation was a failure. Dr. Starr points out that only about one case in fourteen is open to operation; and with the final result of operations for the cure of epilepsy, about which we heard so much a short time ago, he is " exceedingly disappointed." 25 It is not to be disputed that the certain cure of any sick man depends on the accurate determination of his disease. It cannot be denied that a clear conception of the normal functions of a part is the necessary basis for the recognition of the abnormality of function which consti- tutes disease. It follows that the cure of disease must be founded on the knowledge of the normal functions of the body. It has been pointed out that this knowledge has been gained and must continue to be gained largely from experiments on living animals. Vivisection is therefore an indispensable aid to the practice of medicine and the progress of medi- cal science and an indispensable agent in the preservation of the public health. Cruelty is the intentional infliction of unnecessary pain. By far the greater number of vivisections cause no real suffering, because the animals employed are made insensible to pain. The occasional vivi- sections in which narcotics are not used because they temporarily sus- pend the functions to be studied are not cruel. The pain they inflict is necessary to the better knowledge of the functions of the body and necessary therefore to the better preservation of the lives of men and of domestic animals. Countless multitudes of animals are slaughtered daily, without narcotics, to furnish food. This is not thought cruel. Other animals are mercilessly hunted down because their furs keep off the cold. Even this is not thought cruel. Yet the prof essional scientist, highly educated, carefully trained, laboring with small material reward for the advancement of learning and the public good, is held up to pub- lic condemnation, because, in the pursuit of those truths which underlie the successful fight against disease, he finds it necessary to study the functions of unconscious animals and very, very rarely to perform operations in which suffering cannot wholly be avoided. The statutes of the Commonwealth prescribe the penalties to be in- flicted on those found guilty of cruelty to animals, and on those who seek to disturb their fellow-citizens in the pursuit of their lawful occupa- tions. The physiologist and the pathologist take their stand within the common law, ready at any time to submit to the impartial verdict of competent judges the method by which they endeavor to teach and to advance the science and the art of medicine. Boston, July 12, 1S95. T/te foreffoing article is reprinted in full that readers of the paper vjhick precedes it may verify its quotations . EXT&ACT FROM THE ANXUAL ADDRESS BEAD .TCNE 7, 1871, BEFORE The Massachusetts Medical Society, HENRY ,1. HIGELOAY, M. D., PROFESSOR OF SURGERY IN HARVARD UNIVERSITY. " How few facts of immediate considei'able value to our race have of late years been extorted from the dreadful sufferings of dumb animals, the cold-blooded cruelties now more and more practiced under the authority of science! The horrors of Vivisection have supplanted the solemnity, the thrill ing fascination, of the old unetherized operation upon the human sufferer. Their recorded phenomena, stored away by the physiological inquisitor on dusty shelves, are mostly of as little present value to man as the knowledge of a new comet, . . . contemptible, compared with the price paid for it in agopy and torture. For every inch cut by one of these experimenters in the quivering tissues of the helpless dog or rabbit or Guinea-pig, let him Insert a lancet one-eighth of an inch into his own skin, and for every inch more he cuts let him advance the lancet another eighth of an inch, and whenever he seizes, with ragged forceps, a nerve or spinal marrow, the seat of all that is concentrated and exquisite in agony, or literally tears out nerves by their roots, let him cut only one-eighth of an inch further, and he may have some faint suggestion of the atrocity he la perpetrating when the Guinea-pig shrieks, the poor dog yells, the noble horse groans and strains — the heartless vivisector perhaps resenting the struggle which annoys him. . . . If a skillfully constructed hypothesis could be elaborated up to the point of experimental test by the most accomplished and successful philosopher, and if then a single experiment, though cruel, would forever settle it, we might reluctantly admit that it was justified. But the instincts of our common humanity indignantly remonstrate against the testing of clumsy or unimportant hypotheses by prodigal experi- mentation, or making the torture of animals an exhibition to enlarge a Medical School, or for the entertainment of students, not one in fifty of whom can turn it to any profitable account. The limit of such physiological experiment, in its utmost latitude, should be to establish truth in the hands of a skillful experimenter, with the greatest economy of suffering, and not to demonstrate it to ignorant classes and encourage them to repeat it. The reaction which follows every excess will in time bear Indig- nantly upon this. Until then it is dreadful to think how many poor animals will be subjected to excruciating agony as one Medical College after another becomes penetrated with the idea that vivisection is a part of modern teaching, and that, to hold way with other institutions, they, too, must have their vivisector, their mutilated dogs, their Guinea-pigs, their rabbits, their chamber of torture and of horrors, to advertise as a laboratory." Copies of thispgtffTilft m"^, "belicNi.through the address below. Price, sixy^njl^^i^k^ post^pktc^t^teK. copies for Jifty cents. Providence, R. I. UistgmplU(t »