732 The Recent “ Vivisection ” Case . [December, 
the general public, and which are on principle ignored by 
the “ honourable men” who conduct the agitation. Hence 
the outside world is naturally led to believe that the accusa- 
tions against us are true, and that we have no defence to 
offer. The position is really more serious than many of us 
seem to understand. The hysterical party who are organised 
to crush Physiological research in Britain, or if possible, in 
the world, are supported by “ persons of consideration,” 
whose wealth is only exceeded by their ignorance of the 
true bearing of the question. In the press they are powerful. 
At least one daily paper and one weekly journal, both of 
which have the ear of the present administration, are 
plainly against us. So are all the “ Society” organs and the 
so-called “ Christian” papers, thus exhibiting the curious 
spectacle of an alliance between Vanity Fair and Little 
Bethel — fashion and frivolity leagued with puritanism to 
suppress scientific research. In the same cause we see 
ecclesiastical dignitaries fraternising with dog-fanciers and 
sport-loving squires. In short, a great if not a preponderat- 
ing portion of the most powerful interests in these realms 
are arrayed against us. Further, our opponents are 
organised whilst we stand isolated and ready to be hunted 
down in detail. For this purpose our enemies — it is no use 
disguising their real position — need only go on as they have 
begun. 
Professor Ferrier, though the summons has been dis- 
missed, has, in our opinion, suffered grievous wrong, and 
wrong for which he can obtain no redress. He has been 
put to very heavy expense, and what is perhaps to a scientific 
man still worse, to loss of time, anxiety, and distraction of 
mind. He will be held up to execration on sentimentalist 
platforms, and doubtless prayed at by the Holy Willies of 
Edinburgh. It may, perhaps, strike certain Honorary 
Secretaries that if scientific men can be thus annoyed, even 
though the cases break down, the ends sought may be 
gained. It will be perceived that this Act which counsel 
— we suppose ironically — described as “ made for the benefit 
of the medical profession,” and “framed so that there 
should be no restriction of experiments in the interests of 
Science,” is fearfully elastic. That it has failed in doing 
what was amiably, or we might say fondly, hoped by its 
promoters, that is, in putting an end to the sensational 
agitation, is patent. As the matter stands it seems that 
merely looking at or making any observations upon an 
animal which has undergone an operation subjects the 
observer or spectator, if not to a penalty, still to serious 
