Regarding the allopath’s outlook upon osteopathy, the osteopath points to the decision of the Supreme Court of Missouri that one school of practice is incompetent to testify against another. This decision covers the point of allopathic testimony versus osteopathic. Even though this seems to be regarded by the osteopathic profession as a victory, by no means can it justly be considered as such. No court will admit what is legally termed prejudice to testimony, no matter what may be the subject under consideration. Such a decision merely emphasizes the fact that prejudice exists between the allopath and osteopath. In an effort to free my remarks as far as possible from such prejudice, I Shall let their own authorities speak for them.