"Now, Doctor, we feel that you have the success of Osteopathy at heart, and if you realize the activity and complete organization of the American Medical Association and their efforts to curb our limitations, and do not become a member of this Association, which stands opposed to the efforts of the big monopoly, we must believe that you are not familiar with the earnestness of the A. O. A. and its efforts. We must work in harmonious accord and with an organized purpose. _When we rest on our oars the death knell begins to sound._ Can you not see that unless you co-operate with your fellow-practitioners in this national effort you are _sounding your own limitations_?" This from the _secretary_ of the American Osteopathic Association, when we have boasted of superior equipment for intelligent physicians. Incidentally we pause to make excuse for the expressions: "Curbing our limitations" and "sounding your own limitations." But does the idea that when we quit working as an organized body "_our death knell begins to sound_," indicate that Osteopathic leaders are content to trust the future of Osteopathy to its merits? If Osteopathic promoters do not feel that the life of their science depends on boosting, what did the secretary of the A.O.A. mean when he said, "Upon the success of these efforts depends the weal or woe of Osteopathy as an independent system"? If truth always grows under persecution, how can the American Medical Association kill Osteopathy when it is so well known by the people? Nearly four thousand Osteopaths are scattered in thirty-six States where they have some legal recognition, and they are treating thousands of invalids every day. If they are performing the wonderful cures Osteopathic journals tell of, why are we told that the welfare of the system depends upon the noise that is made and the boosting that is done? Has it required advertising to keep people using anesthetics since it was demonstrated that they would prevent pain? Has it required boosting to keep the people resorting to surgery since the benefits of modern operations have been proved? Does it look as if Osteopathy has been standing or advancing on its merits? Does it not seem that Osteopathy, as a complete system, is mostly a _name_, and "lives, moves, and has its being" in boosting? It seems to have been about the best boosted fad ever fancied by a foolish people. Governors and senators have boosted for it. Osteopathic journals have published again and again the nice things a number of governors said when they signed the bills investing Osteopathy with the dignity of State authority. A certain United States senator from Ohio has won more notoriety as a champion of Osteopathy than he has lasting fame as a statesman.