In 1849-50 I was a student in Paris, and, with the narrow range of thought which marks youth, I was extremely interested in the investigations respecting the liver and gall bladder which Claude Bernard (Majendie’s successor) was then carrying on and lecturing upon at the Collège de France and the Sorbonne. I called upon M. Bernard to ask him where I could find some work on ‘Physiologie Appliquée’ which would show me how the results of these investigations could be applied to the benefit of man. M. Bernard received me with the utmost courtesy, but told me there was no such book written; the time had not come for the deductions I sought; experimenters were simply accumulating facts. We are still, forty years later, vainly accumulating facts! This present summer Dr. Semmola, ‘one of the most brilliant pupils of Claude Bernard,’ lectured in Paris on Bright’s disease, which he has been studying for forty years with unlimited experimentation on the lower animals, for the purpose of producing in them artificial inflammation and disease of the kidneys. What is the result to the human being of all this prolonged and ingenious suffering inflicted on helpless creatures? ‘Dr. Semmola insisted upon temperance in eating as well as drinking, and said that the best way to preserve health was to eat only what was needed for the nourishment of the body.’ No cure for the human malady had resulted from this persistent experimentation. Is it not intellectual imbecility to waste thought and ingenuity in putting animals to lingering and painful deaths in order to reassert the well-proved fact that intemperance in eating and drinking will produce forms of digestive and excretory disease varying with the idiosyncrasy of the individual? In late discussions in the French Academy of Medicine relative to chloroform, where Laborde and Franck exhibited experiments on animals, Dr. Le Fort (the distinguished surgeon) says: ‘None of these experiments give us any instruction whatever which is useful in practical surgery. Whatever their scientific interest may be, their deductions are in no way applicable to man. Experimenters relate causes of death, but nothing of the sort is generally found in the deaths of practical surgery. The man faints when operations are begun too soon, or is frightened by preparations. He dies because, being a man, his nervous system reacts in a different way from that of the dog or the rabbit. Do not count in any way upon the teachings of physiologists in practical matters. Don’t let your patient see any preparations, give the chloroform slowly, wait till he is profoundly asleep. That is all you can do.’