J. S. KINGSLEY 



PROFESSOR OF BIOLOGY, TUFTS COLLEGE, 

 MASSACHUSETTS 



I HAVE been asked to appear, in the name of Tufts Col- 

 lege and its Medical School, as an opponent of these bills. 

 I will not take your time in rehearsing all of our objections, 

 since many of these have been stated before and my protest 

 would be merely cumulative ; but I would say that I in- 

 dorse, so far as I recall them, every argument that has been 

 made by the remonstrants. There are, however, a few points 

 in which the bills are fatally defective, to which I would 

 call your special attention, although these points have also 

 been emphasized elsewhere. 



In the first place they are objectionable in that they limit 

 investigation to Doctors of Medicine, regardless of the fact 

 that Doctors of Philosophy and Science have had a training 

 at least as thorough as that required for the medical degree, 

 and regardless of the fact that many of our ablest inves- 

 tigators are outside the medical profession. Under its 

 provisions an Agassiz could not carry on his work. 



Second, it (No. 856) is objectionable in the fact that all 

 investigations which it permits must have as their distinct 

 object the betterment of human health. It utterly ignores 

 the demands of pure science. One cannot foretell what 

 facts can benefit man. A little more than one hundred 

 years ago an Italian noticed that the legs of a frog, when 

 touched with iron and copper, twitched. Could there, ap- 

 parently, be any observation more remote from practical 

 interests than this? Could there be one the investigation 



