SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE. 127 



pared with the demoralizing and degrading action of the law upon the 

 noble profession of medicine. This law places the professors of medicine 

 in the same position as the licensed publican, and for the same reason." 

 And again, '' it tempts weak men to weak practices ; increases the number 

 of experimentalists ; makes experiments all but useless, and does not limit 

 cruelty," There are, however, some restrictions to which Sir Benjamin has 

 no objection. 



Such laws are mainly advocated by the various "humane societies," 

 and we turn to documents issued by several such societies to learn their 

 positions on the question. The Thirtieth Annual Report of The American 

 Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, of New York, shows that 

 the efforts of that society in 1895 were restricted to stopping and remedying 

 maltreatment of horses and other domestic animals. Vivisection is not 

 mentioned. A letter to its secretary asking the position of the society on 

 this matter has brought no response. A pamphlet on Work Accomplished 

 by the Toronto Humane Society during 1887-91 shows that this society 

 has covered a wider field. It has labored against abuse of beasts of burden, 

 cruelty in the transportation of live stock, overloading horse cars, improper 

 horseshoeing, the use of the check-rein and burr-bit, killing insect-eating 

 birds and robbing their nests, killing birds for women's hats, clipping 

 horses and docking their tails, cutting dogs' ears and tails, trap-shooting of 

 pigeons and other birds, matches for cock and dog fighting, bleeding live 

 calves periodically, plucking live fowls, and dehorning cattle. This society 

 also protects children. Here, again, is no mention of vivisection. If these 

 aims are not sufficient for any humane society it might add efforts against 

 the slaughter of seals and other animals for their furs, robbing eider ducks' 

 nests of down, killing small game birds which yield insignificant food sup- 

 plies, caponizing cockerels, gelding horses without anaesthetics, hunting 

 solely for amusement, especially where the birds or animals are bred for 

 the purpose, the prolonged process of killing food animals required by the 

 Hebrew theology, deserting or "losing" cats by families changing their 

 residences, and confining animals in menageries so that they sicken and 

 die prematurely. These things, as well as those previously mentioned, 

 have not, like vivisection, the purpose of increasing knowledge, but cater 

 only to the appetite, the vanity, the amusement, or the over-exacting con- 

 venience of men and women. The American Humane Association is one 

 society that has busied itself with vivisection. It has been taking a census 

 of opinions from clergymen, authors and editors, educators, and physicians 

 of over fifteen years' practice more than two thousand in all by sending 

 out statements of four differing views from which a choice could be made. 

 Its replies from clergymen and authors carry little weight, as presumably 

 none of these gentlemen ever saw a vivisection ; and those from educators, 

 excepting what teachers of biology there might be among them, are scarcely 

 better. Only the physicians can be presumed to know what they were 

 talking about, and of these there were for vivisection without restriction, 

 220 ; for vivisection when restricted to useful ends and under careful super- 

 vision, 513; for vivisection restricted and supervised by law, if it be with- 

 out pain, 186; for the total prohibition of vivisection, 207; obscure or 

 evasive, 24; total, 1,150. It thus appears that there is a wholesome differ- 

 ence of opinion on this subject among mature physicians, but that more of 

 them favor vivisection as reputable men of science would voluntarily con- 



