10 
Disunion in the Camp . 
[January, 
yellow fever, to stamp it out as he stamped out silk-worm 
disease. He goes with his life in his hand to slay disease. 
Colville and Payne (Englishmen) went to Astrakan to study 
the plague ; they went forth nobly, as medical men should 
go, to confront the plague in its home. They exposed their 
lives, and I am convinced that the humblest member in my 
profession is so imbued with its traditions, so educated, that 
whether it be the cholera, the plague, or typhus he has to 
encounter when called in, he will be at his post, faithful unto 
death. It is for those unselfish men, for Brunton, Frazer, 
Lister, Sanderson, Greenfield, Ewart, I ask your sympathy 
and support ; for the leaders in medicine, who are striving 
in this prosaic weary work-a-day world, like the knights of 
old, to overcome the powers that surround us, the hidden, 
unseen, impalpable agents of disease and death, to bring 
them into subjection to laws of health, to benefit you and 
posterity.” 
Let us examine this passage. There is first the promise 
“ not to hurt the most ardent anti-viviseCtionists.” We may 
here well ask, what are their claims to such tender treat- 
ment ? Is it because they have been considerate of the 
feelings of men of Science ? Few agitators have dealt more 
liberally in the foulest abuse than have the leaders of this 
humanitarian movement. The motives, the characters, and 
the reputations of men, living or dead, who are known to 
have experimented upon live animals, have been vilified 
without scruple. Where the constituted authorities have 
refused to be swayed by clamour, our enemies have not hesi- 
tated to appeal to popular violence, as when the Physiolo- 
gical Institute of the University of Leipzig was stormed and 
ravaged by an anti-vivisedtionist mob. 
Or has the hysterical party merited especial consideration 
by the integrity and chivalrous candour they have shown ? 
We are well aware that fanatics of all grades have some- 
what confused notions of the distinction between truth and 
falsehood. But the anti-viviseCtionists have in this respeCt 
outdone the bulk of agitators. Both in England and on the 
Continent they have not scrupled to represent Mr. Darwin 
as having expressed himself in their favour, although he 
distinctly says, in his letter to Prof. Holmgren, “ I know 
that Physiology cannot possibly progress except by means 
of experiments upon living animals, and I feel the deepest 
conviction that he who retards the progress of Physiology 
commits a crime against mankind.” 
Again, at one time letters appeared in the “ Standard,” 
and we believe in other papers also, complaining that young 
