New-York tribune., 1902-12-28
medical science In an essay. first published III

medical science. In an essay hrst puoiisheo ii'
1900. he says:
usefiiIy popuarize chemistry and electricity thsr
teaching and their But Il
is not SO with painful vvisection for there are als
pufsued nos only By torurng animals the word
torture is here Intentionally used to convey the
dsa Gf be Sery pan isseof o ndent
fe bnt as often only after hours DAYS Of
fined nfiction continuously or at var he
aomebody to xii him The Hndoo uttee has been
o9shea be 5er taken ts brief death by
burning would be considered happy release & py d
of nl1sn fhe animals VINO slowly die in
1ne Ihe 1 5p0be beyng shs Other
wolves the infiction of torture 10 ,.e Of h o
be no that in this relation there exists a. case
Of cruelty to animals far h n has m bee
known the history Of nations There will some
x,vseetion tIss in the name Of science. they now
do burning at the stake In the name OF rehsioi.
This quotation is from an essay in Dr. Biselow' s
Surgical Anmsthesia published in 1900 by Little.
Brown & Co.. of Boston. Does any one fancy that
a surgeon connected with a medical school for
nearly forty years does not know what vivfsection
means of its utility IN medicine?
DR. George NJ Gould, the present Editor OF
American Medicine and of the leading writ
ers upon medical subjects in this country Is aple TO
tell what abuses need reform His words are
the more significant because he is one of the
strongest opponents of ant-vivisectfon In America
In an address delivered before the American Acad-
erny of Medicine in 1896 DIR. Gould said:
| believe scientific men have made grave mis-
take in opposing the limitation of vivisection mot
mortisection) experimentation to those ntted py
education and position to properly choose ana
properly execute such experimentatons AT
present the greatest sharD is done true science Dy
men who conduct experiments without preliminary
knowledge choose. without Judgment 10 carry
out without true scientific training or method and
only in the interest of vanity. Dr. Klein, a
phvsioogist before the royal commission testlneu
that he had no regard at all for the sufferings OF
the animals he used and never used arsesthetlcS
except for didactic purposes unless necessary for
his own convenience. and that he had no time LOT
thinking what the animal would feel or surfer: IL
may be denied. but ] certain few american
experimenterS feel the same way ana act IN de-
cordance with their feelings. But they are NOT Dy
any means the majority and they must not only pe
silenced. but their useless and unscientihc WORK
should be stopped. They disgrace both TO
science and humanity.
The question issue, therefore. is not one or the
prohibition of vivsection. 1t is question simply
whether admitted and acknowledged abuses snail
continue, present, without legal restraint OF
whether they shall be condemned by the law III
the yivisection Of animals has led to abuses that
every one must regret. If. in the words OF the
great surgeon. ''it is not an innocent study, why
cannot we all unite il: such measures OF reform as
under the gl1ise a scientific method, except as a
0 N ALBERT LEFFINGWELL.
Secretary of the American Society for the hes uld
tion Of Vivsection.
Aurora, N Y, Dec. 26, 1902.