146 THE ENZYME TREATMENT OF CANCER
amylopsin, for a knowledge of which the world is so greatly indebted to Corvisart * and Kühne** never entered into the sphere of Pasteur’s researches.
The interesting thing is, according to his own testimony,*** that Pasteur’s work, like mine since 1888, centred in the fundamental discovery of an antithesis. Some medical men of Pasteur’s day denied the truth of his conclusions, either on flimsy evidences or on none at all—just as happens to-day. Equally they sought to deny the scientific investigator the right to any opinion on a question regarded by them as medical, but which was really scientific. “ What !“ cried Pasteur, “ I have been engaged for twenty years in research on a subject, and have no right to an opinion? And the right of verifying, controlling, discussing, and questioning belongs more especially to him who has done nothing to clear up the matter, to one who has just read more or less attentively my works with his feet on the fender! You say, my dear colleague, that in the actual state of science it is better to have no opinion. Ah, well! I, even I, have one, and not of sentiment, but of reason, for I have acquired the right by twenty years of assiduous work. My opinion, or better, my conviction is, that in the actual state of science of which you speak spontaneous generation is a chimaera, for my experiences are complete, and they all prove that spontaneous generation is a chimaera. As to my opponents, proof in hand I have contradicted every one of their assertions, and they have never dared
* Corvisart, Lucien: “Sur une Fonction peu connue du Pancreas,” Paris, 1857-58, pp. 1-123.
** Kühne, Wilhelm: “Ueber das Verhalten verschiedener organisirter und sog. ungeformter Fermente,” and “Uber das Trypsin (Enzym des Pankreas),” Verhandl. des Heidelb. Naturhist. Med. Vereins. N.S., I., No. 3, 1876, pp.1-10
*** Vallery-Radot, René: “La Vie de Pasteur,” Paris, 1901.