178 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



else is considered, the evidence proves too much. The man of pure 

 and upright life ; the heroic defender of the weak against the brutal ; 

 the tireless organizer of a society, for the main object of which he has 

 secured legislative and legal co-operation, and the sympathy of the 

 better part of the community, surely such a man can not be a common 

 scold and an habitual liar. 



Is there a less harsh alternative ? After thoughtful consideration 

 of nearly all Mr. Bergh's published writings, and of several courteous 

 private letters, I conclude that, in regard to experimentation upon ani- 

 mals he is not morally perverse, but mentally incapacitated for accu- 

 rate observation, correct quotation, logical argument, or legitimate con- 

 clusion ; that, in short, so far as vivisection is concerned, he is of un- 

 sound mind.* This charitable view of his character may serve to 

 explain passages like the following: \ " As another proof of the profane 

 extremes to which these dissectors of living animals will go, Robert 

 McDonald, M. D., declared that he had opened the veins of a dying 

 person, remember, and had injected the blood of an animal into them, 

 many times, and had met with brilliant success. In other words, this 

 potentate has discovered the means of thwarting the decrees of Provi- 

 dence, where a person was dying, and snatching away from its Maker 

 a soul which he had called away from earth." \ 



In view of all these things, is Mr. Bergh's single-handed crusade 

 against practical physiology anything more than an unintentional bur- 

 lesque of reform ? Is it compatible with the highest usefulness of the 

 society which he represents or with the dignity of the Legislature of a 

 great State that he should be permitted to repeat the fiasco ? Should 

 he persist, in open disregard of his own dictum, " Laws can not pre- 

 cede public opinion, but must be the outgrowth of that opinion," the 

 interests of humanity in its widest sense would certainly be promoted 

 in this State by the authoritative assurance that his extreme views 

 are not shared by the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty 

 to Animals. 



V. The concluding division of this article combines : A. A sum- 

 mary of the facts and views already presented ; B. A brief statement 

 of certain matters which could not be fully discussed on this occasion ; 

 C. An expression of what I believe to be the sentiment of unpreju- 

 diced, humane, well-informed persons respecting the legitimacy of 

 experiments upon animals and the desirability of legal interference 

 therewith. 



* This idea is suggested, perhaps without design, in Dr. Dalton's characterization of 

 Mr. Bergh's attack upon Magendie as " crazy maledictions." " Magendie as a Physiolo- 

 gist," ,( International Review," February, 1880. 



\ Vivisection address, p. 15. 



X See also his letter respecting experiments upon transfusion, " New York Evening 

 Post," Feb. 28, 1883. 



