THE VIVISECTION QUESTION. 785 



the prosecution of physiological education and research with una- 

 bated energy. Hence no legislative action should be taken which 

 could possibly offer hindrance or annoyance to either teachers or 

 investigators. 



In accordance with the pernicious principle that a law can do 

 no harm except to offenders, the English Parliament, in 1876, 

 passed an act severely restricting vivisectional work. This action 

 of England was promptly reversed by every other European na- 

 tion where the subject was agitated, and by every State Legisla- 

 ture in this country to which the matter has been referred. 

 Within the past year this reversal has been reaffirmed in Switzer- 

 land and in Massachusetts. The restrictive act in England served 

 not in the least to abate the agitation and protect physiologists in 

 their work, as was intended ; but, as an eminent English physi- 

 ologist puts it, has " only tended to encourage the opponents of 

 science in their vexatious interference." English antivivisec- 

 tiouists under this encouragement have shifted position from 

 restriction to total abolition, and have increased the agitation. 

 We have in this country at least three societies organized on the 

 platform of total abolition of physiological experiments. The 

 legislative measures advanced thus far by these organizations 

 have been mild in the main ; but while they emphasize before the 

 public the fact that their laws do not aim to " prohibit " experi- 

 ments, they are also unguarded enough to speak of them as " the 

 entering wedge for more radical measures in the future." * Clear- 

 ly, for medical and scientific faculties, for medical societies, and 

 for all who have at heart the advancement of humanity and sci- 

 ence, the strategic point at which to meet the enemy is the point 

 of " the entering wedge." 



After conscientiously reading their literature for the j)ast five 

 years I feel warranted in saying that science has little to fear 

 from the efforts of the antivivisection societies. Their methods 

 of agitation would sink even a worthy cause. The real danger 

 lies with scientific men themselves who entertain ideas of con- 

 ciliation and compromise which will admit the point of the " en- 

 tering wedge." Prof. Michael Foster has had the benefit of twenty 

 years' experience in conducting a laboratory under restrictive 

 legislation, and his advice should certainly carry great weight. 

 He writes as follows : " My earnest advice " (to us in America) 

 " is to straighten your backs, and, knowing that no legislation is 

 necessary on grounds of humanity, and that all legislation is bad 

 for science, strain every effort to defeat the agitation." f 



* Antivivisection, June, 1896, pp. 9 and 13. Aurora, 111. 



•(• Private letter from Prof. Foster to the writer, under date of February 1, 1896. 

 VOL. XLIX. — 61 



