HAROLD C. ERNST 157 



intended to give pain, implying that the operation must 

 be performed with malice ; or, they may be interpreted 

 as meaning experiments that will give pain. In this case 

 the extreme difficulty of knowing what the signs of pain 

 are in any given instance would stand in the way of a true 

 interpretation of the phenomena seen and certainly such 

 an interpretation cannot be left to unskilled agents. 



Second, we object to paragraph a, because it is intended, 

 as counsel informed us, to do away with any animal experi- 

 mentation whatever, painful or painless, for purposes of 

 teaching or demonstration and this we hold to be an 

 unjustifiable limitation of teaching in medicine, or in biol- 

 ogy in general. In the second place, it practically pre- 

 vents any experimentation whatever; for of very few 

 series of experiments can it be said beforehand that they 

 will surely be useful in saving or prolonging human life or 

 alleviating human suffering. 



It can only be said that it is with these objects in view 

 that they are undertaken ; what the result will be, the 

 result only can show, and few experimenters would care 

 to take the risks involved if this section should become 

 a law. 



It practically calls a halt, and says legally, what one of 

 the petitioners has already said in terms, that we have 

 learned all we are to be allowed to learn, and must be con- 

 tent in the future with what we know now. 



Surely this cannot be the meaning of the majority, 

 even of those who support this bill. 



11 (ft) Such experiment shall be performed only 



12 by a graduate in medicine of a legally chartered 



13 college or university hauing the power to confer 



14 degrees in medicine, and in a building and in a 



15 part thereof which has been previously registered 



1 6 with the secretary of the Commonwealth by a 



