everal years. The abuses
and cruelties on the Continent, against which it had so vigorously
protested, continued as before. In a brief editorial, the London
Lancet, on April 3, 1869, again referred to the subject:

"VIVISECTION.--The subject of vivisection has been again brought on
the tapis, owing to some remarks made by Professor (Claude) Be'rnard
... at the Colle`ge de France.... He admits on one occasion having
operated on an ape, but never repeated the experiment, THE CRIES AND
GESTURES OF THE ANIMAL TOO CLOSELY RESEMBLING THOSE OF A MAN.

"As the Pall Mall Gazette remarks, M. (Claude) Be'rnard expatiates on
the subject with a complacency which reminds us of Peter the Great,
who, wishing, while at Stockholm, to see the WHEEL in action, quietly
offered one of his suite as the patient to be broken on it....

"We consider that vivisection constitutes a legitimate mode of inquiry
when it is adopted to obtain a satisfactory solution of a question
that has been fairly discussed, and can be solved by no other means....

"We hold that for mere purposes of curiosity, OR TO EXHIBIT TO A CLASS
what may be rendered equally--if not more--intelligible by diagrams or
may be ascertained by anatomical investigation or induction,
VIVISECTION IS WHOLLY INDEFENSIBLE, and IS ALIKE ALIEN TO THE FEELINGS
AND HUMANITY OF THE CHRISTIAN, THE GENTLEMAN, AND THE PHYSICIAN."

It is very probable that much of the criticism of foreign vivisection,
which at this period appeared in the medical journals of England, was
inspired by the abhorrence felt regarding the cruelty of certain
French physiologists. We now know that the worst and most cruel of
them all was Claude Be'rnard, Professor of Experimental Physiology at
the Colle`ge de France, and the fit successor of Magendie. Just as
pirates and freebooters have added to geographical discoveries, so
science admits that regarding the functions of certain organs he added
to accumulated facts. But the peculiar infamy of Be'rnard was the
indifference displayed toward animal suffering long after the
discovery of chloroform and ether, and his practical contempt for any
sentiment of compassion for vivisected animals. Of this savagery one
will look in vain for criticism or condemnation in the writings of the
opponents of vivisection reform at the present day. Two physicians,
however, have told us what they witnessed in the laboratory of
Be'rnard. On February 2, 1875, there appeared in the Mornin