Mr. TITCOMB.-But a crucifixion with a sponge and spear is unique. Then with regard to what fell from Mr. Moule as to taking with caution the assertions of the Jesuits; that no doubt, is very important, but I would call to his attention that Gutslaff, the great Chinese missionary, and others, quote them, and say with reference to one of the earliest Chinese books, in existence before the Jesuits came, and dealing with a period long anterior to Christianity, that it contains the history of Fo-hi and the Deluge, showing that Fo-hi came from western parts with seven companions-his wife, three sons, and three daughters. That thoroughly gets rid of the idea that there has been any manufacturing in the matter. Similar things are to be found throughout the world, and yet we are told that they arise from the constitution of the human mind, and that no just argument as to a common origin is to be drawn from them. No doubt that is logical and true to a certain extent, but yet it must be taken within certain limits.

Mr. Row.-Oh, of course.

Mr. TITCOMB. For instance, I have not taken the general idea of serpentworship. It appears to me that naturally the serpent would have been taken as an embodiment of evil to be worshipped from dread, but I believe that the evidence which I have drawn from serpent-worship is not based upon that natural disposition of the human mind, but upon the concurrence of artificial and otherwise not natural ideas which appear and reappear here, there, and everywhere, and which I think indicate, from their general concurrence, a common origin. You find a serpent, a tree, fruit, a man and woman, and the serpent in an erect position. Will you tell me that it is a natural development of the human mind to make these representations in consequence of the general idea of serpent-worship from dread? I can imagine that such things may have nothing to do with Scripture, but when you come to the artificial combination of these various parts, the whole question is different. If we are candid, and reason without prejudgment for or against, it is à priori reasonable to suppose that there must have been a common origin. The general fact that all nations have a deluge would not prove the deluge of Noah; but when you come to a multitude of these cases grouped togetherthe deluge of Chaldea, the deluge related by Lucian, the deluge of Coxcox, and the deluge of Satyaurata-from different parts of the world and in different ages-not a bare deluge, but one in which people are preserved, and in which you have the division of two and two animals; and a deluge caused, too, by the moral degeneracy of mankind, subsequent to which there is a dispersion of the new race over the world-all these things present peculiarities and specialties so diverse from the uninformed conception of the human mind, that I think they indicate a common origin. It is like the putting together of different bones on the principles of comparative anatomy and declaring that they all belonged to one animal. But this does not touch what Mr. Henslow has said. He says the sceptic might say "You have collected together an accumulation of facts all of which are agreeable to each other, but how can you prove that the Scripture is not part and parcel of the same congeries of events, and has not taken up the same tale?!" But every

thing must have a beginning, and if these stories are not likely to have been invented out of the imaginative faculty independently exercised in different ages, and amongst different nations, there must at least have been a beginning in their origin. Mr. Harriot seemed to indicate that some commercial nation may have carried these stories abroad. Whether that is so or not does not much matter. Supposing that these things are found, we want, by scientific discovery and scholastic research, to know their origin-what has caused that general combination with its divergencies, but yet with such extremely particular agreements ?

Mr. HENSLOW. If it is an open question, is there any possibility of satisfying the sceptic upon the point?

Mr. TITCOMB.-Well, I am not giving this as intended for the sceptic. My paper assumes the Scriptures to be correct, and does not attempt to prove that they are correct, and in that I think its basis is logical. This Society is intended to pursue science fairly and openly, but reverently. It is not for the purpose of proving the Scriptures to be true, but of so searching into science as not to be afraid to compare its results with the Scriptures. That is the only scientific basis on which we can hold our place. I take it that my paper does keep to that ground. It makes no attempt to bolster up the Scriptures, but, addressing Christian men and women, it says that everything goes to show, so far as we can gather from ethnological testimony, that what we believe is really confirmed and borne witness to by all that the paper contains, and I maintain that upon that basis, which is a logical and scientific basis, the paper has proved everything which it undertook to prove. I had no idea in writing the paper that it contained all the materials necessary to convince the sceptic. We do not wish to prove the Bible true, but, believing it to be true, we are not afraid of searching into scientific facts, and, with all the aid that research can give us, of comparing the results with the facts of revelation and the foundations of our belief. If that is the only result of this discussion, it does do what is most important. The words with which I closed my paper, I again repeat :- "Assuming, then, as I hinted at first, that the Pentateuch is both authentic and genuine,-facts which I trust none of you dispute,- —we have in this line of argument an ethnic testimony to its accuracy which cannot but confirm and consolidate our faith, and which, at a time like the present, when the Pentateuch is assailed both by critical and scientific scepticism, must be very consolatory to timid and doubting hearts." We have found facts which do confirm and which do not invalidate those truths that are so dear to all our hearts. (Cheers.)

The CHAIRMAN.-I have not many remarks to offer on the subject which has been before us, except to say how heartily I concur in many of the observations that have been made, and how thankful we ought to be that these matters are discussed with temper and propriety, and with a sincere desire to arrive at the truth. My idea of the Society is that it should take care that facts are facts, and not mere discoveries for the moment to be used as a sort of battery against revealed religion. Our great object is "fact, fact, fact," and I should like to examine those produced by some at the British Associ

ation, and let them examine ours in the same way, and then we should arrive at the truth as to whether they are facts or not. Revelation has no more to fear from science and fact than the moon has to fear from my throwing a stone at it. All I want and ask for is "fact," and the only complaint I have to make is that many people, eager to assail revelation, seize hold of something that is held to be a fact directly it is discovered, and direct it like an Armstrong gun against Revelation, until it is found to be no better than a pop-gun. But what does it do? It shakes the faith of many people who never see the refutation and never know better. I was reading a paper the other day by a French author, M. Pouchaud, who makes this statement, "that since 1806 eighty-six distinct theories, all hostile to revelation, have been constructed upon geology, but that in 1863, when his paper was written, not one of them remained." Yet probably each of those théories made several infidels, who fell into doubt and difficulty from which they never recovered, through not hearing the refutation. Our great object, I repeat, is "fact." I would examine the most telling facts against the revealed word of God with the utmost minuteness and fairness, and take great care not to throw crude theories to the world, before we ascertained whether there is a foundation for them or not. I cannot agree with what fell from my admirable friend Mr. Row, who says that these things are human developments of similar thoughts in different parts of the world. It is true that there are developments of opinion in the mind; but I never heard of similar developments of facts through which a simultaneous belief arose all of a sudden, and in all parts of the world, that there was a deluge, that eight persons were saved from it, and that such and such other things occurred, all going into minute details. Such things, I say, appear to have the character of truth.

Mr. Row. Take the monasteries that exist on the largest scale in Thibet, and other things that show a similarity to the observances of the Romish Church. Those are matters which I referred to.

The CHAIRMAN.-But I do not altogether rely on Huc. I think we must see that all this concurrent testimony from so many parts of the world, all bearing on those points contained in the first eleven chapters of Genesis, make us believe that they proceeded from a common origin, and could not have been the simultaneous and independent growth of many different nations at different periods.

The Meeting was then adjourned.

INTERMEDIATE MEETING, MAY 15, 1871.

THE REV. J. H. TITCOMB, M.A., IN THE CHAIR.

The Minutes of the last Meeting were read and confirmed, and the following Election announced :

MEMBER. The Rev. James Hill, D.D., Greenwich Hospital.

The Rev. C. GRAHAM then read a paper on "Miracles." A Discussion ensued in which the Chairman, Mr. T. Harriot, Mr. Krishnarao Gopal Deshmukh, Mr. Conway, Captain F. Petrie, Mr. C. Dibdin, the Rev. C. A. Row, and the Rev. Sir W. Tilson-Marsh, Bart., joined.

The Rev. C. GRAHAM having replied, the Meeting was adjourned.

ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING, held at the House of the SOCIETY OF ARTS, MONDAY, MAY 22, 1871.

THE RIGHT HON. THE EARL OF SHAFTESBURY, K.G., PRESIDENT, IN THE CHAIR.

The CHAIRMAN.-The proceedings will commence by the Honorary Secretary reading the Annual Report.

FIFTH ANNUAL REPORT of the Council of the VICTORIA INSTITUTE, OR PHILOSOPHICAL SOCIETY OF GREAT BRITAIN.

Progress of the Society.

1. IN presenting a Fifth Annual Report, the Council of the VICTORIA INSTITUTE desires to express its belief that the proceedings of the Session now terminating have considerably advanced the objects of the Society; and it is with great satisfaction that it does not find itself called upon, as in former years, to record a falling off in the number of members; but on the contrary, to announce that the Institute has received a very considerable accession of strength in the new members that have joined.

2. The late Secretary retired on the 1st of February, having been unable to devote that time to the duties of the office which its importance required, after which Captain F. W. H. Petrie and Mr. Reddie were associated as Honorary Secretaries, until the death of the latter. The former now