For the purpose of advancing science and the welfare of the people, there are scores of persons always to be found ready to make personal sacrifices of the kind undertaken by Drs Ragni, Martini, and Gemelli. Unfortunately for English science there are not wanting people in this country who are prepared to threaten with fines and imprisonment any _savant_ who may think it desirable to perform a similar set of feeding experiments on animals. Invaluable for good as our experimental investigations have already been, it would seem as if it were the deliberate aim of these sentimental obstructives to put a stop to the acquisition of all useful knowledge in the future. In reference to the rate of growth of tapeworms, Professor Perroncito’s determinations are useful, inasmuch as they verify certain ascertained facts with precision and confirm the general conclusion that had been drawn by practical helminthologists from various sources of information. In regard to the number of proglottides proper to a sexually mature tapeworm, the circumstance that Perroncito’s calculation was made without the head and a portion of the neck of the worm being present shows that it cannot be relied on absolutely; nevertheless, as far as it goes, it tends to confirm what Leuckart had long previously stated. I have possessed myself of upwards of thirty perfect beef tapeworms expelled from my patients, and in some of the specimens it was noticed that the segmentation-rings in the region of the neck were far more crowded together than they were in others. I also possess a perfect _Tænia mediocanellata_, removed post mortem. Though the rate of growth may be the same from day to day, yet experience has shown that the number of proglottides actually cast off varies exceedingly. Küchenmeister’s estimate of the average number agrees in the main with what we have ourselves observed (five to twenty daily); and here again Perroncito’s investigations serve to verify the general correctness of our previous determinations.