have an aversion to the operations of dissection, yet they never make any opposition to them, provided respect be paid to the laws of decency and salubrity, on account of the deep conviction that prevails of their utility. 10. That the relatives of the deceased seldom or never oppose the opening of any body, if the physicians desire it. That all the medical students in France, with scarcely any exception, dissect, and that that physician or surgeon who is not acquainted with anatomy, is universally regarded as the most ignorant of men. To the other parts of the plan proposed above for supplying the anatomical schools in Great Britain, there appears to be no objections whatever. No one can object to such a disposal of the bodies of those who die in prisons; no one can reasonably object to such a disposal of the bodies of those who die in poor-houses. These persons are pensioners upon the public bounty: they owe the public a debt: they have been supported by the public during life; if, therefore, after death they can be made useful to the public, it is a prejudice, not a reason--it is an act of injustice, not the observance of a duty, which would prevent them from becoming so. It is true that many of these persons are honest and respectable; and have been reduced to indigence by misfortune: were they all so it would not alter the state of the argument. Some concession and co-operation on the part of the public, for this great public object, is indispensable, without which nothing can be done: but if any concession be made, it can be made with respect to this class of persons better than any other, because it can be made with less violation of public feeling. Nor is any indignity either intended or offered to these persons. They are appropriated to this service not because they are poor, but because they are friendless: because, that is, no persons survive them who take such an interest in their fate as to be rendered unhappy by this disposal of their remains. That they are without friends is no good reason why their memory should be treated with indignity; but it is a good reason, it is the best possible reason why they should be selected for this public service. Poverty, it is true, is a misfortune: poverty, it is true, has terror and pain enough in itself: no legislature ought by any act to increase its wretchedness; but the measure here proposed is pregnant with good to the poor, and would tend more than can be estimated to lessen the misery of their condition. For it would give knowledge to the lowest practitioners of the medical art; that is, to the persons who are at present lamentably deficient, and into whose hands the great bulk of the poor fall. And, after all, the true question is, whether the surgeon shall be allowed to gain knowledge by operating on the bodies of the dead, or driven to obtain it by practising on the bodies of the living. If the dead bodies of the poor are not appropriated to this use, their living bodies must