n animals
that are nearest allied to man, such as the monkey, the hog, and the
dog, and who share with the king of creation the privilege of eating a
little of everything. Claude Bernard, however, had another way of
looking at things. It is true that he especially made researches into
the general laws of physiology, the secret of the vital functions, and
the operation of the various organic systems that constitute living
matter, but his immediate object was not to furnish weapons for the art
of curing. He left to physicians and surgeons the care of drawing
conclusions from his great work in biology, and of acting experimentally
upon animals allied to man in order to found a rational system of
therapeutics. So he preferred to operate upon beings placed low in the
animal scale--the frog especially, an animal that has rendered him
greater service than even man himself could have done. Cold-blooded
animals offer, moreover, the advantage of being less impressionable than
others, and the experiments to which they are submitted present more
accurate conclusions, since it is not necessary to take so much account
of the victim's restlessness. And then it is necessary in many cases to
choose subjects that possess endurance. The unfortunate frog, so aptly
named "the Job of physiology," becomes resigned to living under most
dreadful conditions, and when, through sheer exhaustion, he has
succumbed, his twitching limbs may still he used as an object of
experimentation for twenty-four hours. Thanks are due to nature for
giving so extraordinary a vitality to the tissues of a modest
batrachian! We owe to it the famous experiment of Galvani that led Volta
to the discovery of the pile and what followed it, the astonishing
conquests of electricity and those more marvelous ones still that are
now in their dawn. Science is much indebted to the frog, and may the
homage that we pay him help to alleviate the sufferings that have been
imposed upon this brave animal!

[Illustration: Fig. 6-8 APPARATUS USED IN VIVISECTION.]

The simple fact that we have just enunciated pleads loudly enough for
the cause of vivisection to make it useless to defend it. No one,
however, has risen to ask for an absolute proscription of it, but it is
only desired that the abuse of an abominable practice shall be curbed.
Does the abuse exist? That is the question, and it may be answered in
the affirmative. Yes, we do sometimes impose useless sufferings upon
animals. I