762 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY, 



others. Thus we have no right to restrict the domain of science, and, 

 for the sake of saving some unfortunate being a few passing suffer- 

 ings, to smother in its cradle all the hope of the future. 



The science of life — that is, physiology — can not progress without 

 vivisection. To interdict this practice would be to slay that study. 

 The anatomical examination of the organs teaches us nothing, or 

 hardly anything, respecting their functions. How could we under- 

 stand the circulation of the blood, if our only resource was the ana- 

 tomical study of the heart, arteries, and veins ? What idea would a 

 description of the brain give of the functions of the brain ? We might 

 see the strange forms and complicated structure of the cerebral ap- 

 paratus ; but the examination of these forms would be of no help 

 toward gaining an acquaintance with their offices. The work of 

 physiology is founded entirely on experiment, and the required experi- 

 ments can be made only upon living beings. Sometimes these beings 

 are plants, but this is only a part of physiology. Animal physiology 

 requires animals. The observation of dead bodies is not useful in 

 teaching the laws of life. Suppose a skillful artisan, to whom we give 

 a watch to examine. In vain will he look through his lens at the 

 springs, the wheels, the cogs, the jewels, and the whole machinery, so 

 long as the watch is not wound up ; for he can not find out from this 

 whether it will go or how it goes. To learn the movement of a watch, 

 it must be seen in motion. The same rule is in force for the physi- 

 ologist. A dead organ tells him nothing ; he must see it living. 



There are, then, but two alternatives — either to stop physiology in 

 its progressive course, to shut our books, and give up the study of the 

 vital functions, or to continue the practice of experimental researches 

 and vivisections, as Galen, Harvey, Haller, Magendie, and Claude Ber- 

 nard did. If we think physiology is not a science, or imagine it is 

 useless to man, all right. Let us be contented to observe the stars, 

 and resign ourselves to ignorance of the conditions of our existence. 

 But if we want to sound the mysteries of life, to penetrate to the 

 causes and mechanism of the forces that rule us, then we should con- 

 tinue our efforts without allowing ourselves to be discouraged by un- 

 just attacks. We may be sure of an abundant harvest ; and every 

 day, af the price of a few rabbits, frogs, or dogs, will give us some 

 important discovery. Thus, even if physiology (with which we in- 

 clude vivisection, for they are one) does not immediately give prac- 

 tical contributions to the relief of the human race, it is nevertheless a 

 good thing, for the immediate result of a discovery is often nothing, 

 while the discovery may perhaps bring about wonderful consequences 

 in the future. 



The favorite argument of the enemies of vivisection is, that physi- 

 ology is of no use in medicine. "Kever," they say, "has a vivisec- 

 tion or a physiological discovery gained by experiment been of any 

 aid to therapeutics. Chance, not physiology, has made us acquainted 



