There are serious objects to this conclusion. The islands off the coast of north-eastern Siberia, are full of delicate granite spires and pinnacles, which would have been destroyed had an icesheet passed over them. Nordenskiöld declares that along the whole of the northern coast of Siberia he could discover no erratics or glacial traces, and uses these emphatic words, "to judge by the appearance of the hills there have not been any glaciers in former times, and this is certainly the case on the mainland. The northernmost part of Asia in that case has never been covered by such an ice-sheet as is assumed by the supporters of a general ice-age embracing the whole globe."* And again he remarks, dealing with the same question: "It may perhaps be uncertain whether a true inland-ice covered the whole country; it is certain that the ice-cap did not extend over the plains of Siberia, where it can be proved that no iceage in a Scandinavian sense ever existed."t Summing up all the results of exploration of the remarkable islands in the Arctic Ocean to the north of Siberia, which contain such numerous remains of the mammoth, we are compelled to conclude, that formerly, and speaking geologically in recent times, the regions north of Siberia enjoyed a milder climate than they possess now. In those days, which were since the appearance of man on the earth, although probably before man had forced his way into northern Siberia, the country had a different aspect and outline from that which now characterises it. At that time a great tract of country must have extended from the mouth of the Lena to the New Siberian Islands, and it stood at a considerable level above the sea, while the islands which now exist in the ocean in that region formed upland districts and mountain ranges. This ancient land was covered with forests, and was traversed by the great Siberian rivers. Vast herds of elephants, rhinoceroses, musk-oxen, and buffaloes roamed over the grassy plains and wandered amidst the forests, and for long they enjoyed a peaceful and secure home. A great catastrophe at last overtook them. The land in the extreme north of Siberia, sank beneath the waters of the Polar Sea. As the waters rose higher and higher, the animals crowded to the uplands for safety, and congregated in enormous numbers on the mountain tops. The land, however, continued to sink, and the waters rose higher *Voyage of the "Vega," vol. i, p. 418. E and higher. The tops of the highest bills were at last submerged, and the destruction was complete. After a time the land began to rise slowly, and the New Siberian and Liakoff islands, which had formed mountains in the land, rose above the waters. As they had formed a last refuge of the animals when the land was submerged, they were naturally covered with the bones, teeth, and tusks of the animals which had been drowned upon them. Currents also, in the waters, swept the bones into various places, accumulating them here and there in large deposits. The climate also at this time underwent a great change, and altered from one of a mild and genial character to one of intense cold and Arctic severity. Sir HENRY HOWORTH stated that many of the facts in Mr. Whitley's paper were to be found in his book The Mammoth and the Flood, and proceeded to mention the historical references to ground ivory as far back as the days of Herodotus. There was proof of a considerable trade in this article in A.D. 1000. In China it was used as a medicine. It is generally supposed that most of it is the remains of the mammoth, or Behemoth of Job, which means "a great, big beast." Cuvier refers to this ground ivory in some of his geological arguments, and to the flesh when thawed being good enough for wild animals to eat, even the eye in some cases had been found in good preservation. Sir Henry had himself corresponded with Darwin on this subject, who considered the problem insoluble. He further stated that the contents of the stomachs had been carefully examined; they showed the undigested food, leaves of trees now found in Southern Siberia, but a long way from the existing deposits of ivory. Microscopic examination of the skin showed the red blood corpuscles, which was a proof not only of sudden death, but that the death was due to suffocation either by gases or water, evidently the latter in this case. But the puzzle remained to account for the sudden freezing up of this large mass of flesh so as to preserve it for future ages. These notes of Sir Henry's speech are felt to be very inadequate, but owing to his subsequent prolonged illness they have not had the benefit of his personal revision. The Meeting adjourned at 6.15 p.m. NOTE BY PROFESSOR HULL, F.R.S. Having read with interest Mr. Whitley's Essay, I wish to add a few remarks thereon. I think the facts he relates regarding the observations of the navigators who have visited the region north of the coast of Siberia justify the author in the conclusion that at the time when the mammoth inhabited this region the climate must have been much milder than at the present time-in order to admit of the growth of trees and vegetation for the sustenance of these huge pachyderms and ruminants. It is also shown that the sea-bed surrounding the Siberian Islands was in the condition of land over which these animals roamed, and is only covered by shallow water at the present time; the submerged land around the islands forms a portion of the "great continental platform "-determined by Dr. F. Nansen (Bathymetrical Features of the North Polar Sea, 1904)-which extends outward from the coast of Europe and Asia, and breaks off at a depth of about 100 fathoms, at which depth the land descends rapidly to depths of 1,000 fathoms or more, a depth which may be presumed to extend under the pole, forming a deep polar basin covered by ice. The conditions described by the author lead us to infer a great upheaval of the sea-bed during the "mammoth period," followed by subsidence resulting in the destruction of the mammoth and rhinoceros, and here a difficulty presents itself, for elevation might have been supposed to result in a climate of increased cold, rather than one which appears to have been almost temperate, and this difficulty is increased when we suppose that the elevation of the sea-level would have produced a barrier between Iceland and Norway sufficient to prevent the entrance of the Gulf Stream and cause it to be diverted southwards. The conditions of the Arctic Ocean, as determined by Nansen, are described in a paper read before the Institute (Journal of Transactions, vol. xxxvii, p. 214, with map) to which the reader is referred.* * For further discussion of the interesting questions raised in this paper see The Mammoth and the Flood, by Sir Henry Howorth, K.C.I.E., F.R.S., now unfortunately out of print. 500TH ORDINARY GENERAL MEETING. MONDAY, JANUARY 10TH, 1910. HELD IN THE LECTURE THEATRE OF THE ROYAL UNITED SERVICES INSTITUTION, BY PERMISSION OF THE COUNCIL, R.U.S.I. LIEUT.-COL. MACKINLAY, CHAIRMAN OF THE COUNCIL, The Minutes of the preceding Meeting were read and confirmed. Associates: Miss A. Habershon. Miss M. Spokes. H. Wilson, Esq. The Chairman congratulated the Institute on its having reached the 500th Ordinary General Meeting, an occasion which, besides being marked by the very valuable paper about to be read, would, he hoped, be made celebrated by increased efforts on behalf of the Institute by all its supporters. The following paper was then read by the Author :— MODERN CONCEPTIONS OF THE UNIVERSE. By G. F. C. SEARLE, M.A., F.R.S., University Lecturer in 1. Introduction. 2. Purpose of the Paper. § 3. The Universe and Human Thought. § 4. The Complexity of the Uni § 9. The Origin of the Universe. 10. Law and Order in the Uni verse. § 11. The Beginning and End of the Universe. § 12. Life and Matter. 13. Origin of Life. 14. The History of Species. § 1. Introduction.-In our discussion this afternoon, I purpose to follow the line of thought adopted in a paper on "The Modern Conception of the Universe," which I read before the Pan-Anglican Congress in 1908. I do so for several reasons. Many people who are anxious to know something of the relation between religion and science are so little acquainted with science that the common-places of physics come as a surprise to them. They are further astonished to find that these commonplaces of physics do bear a very distinct and definite testimony which is of great significance in religious thought. Many of my audience at the Pan-Anglican Congress were probably in this position. They had probably heard much of the supposed defeat of religion by science but comparatively little of the facts of science itself, and hence they were genuinely astonished at the profusion of the testimony which some of the simplest facts of science bear to the fundamental article of religious belief. This astonishment is only what might have been expected, for during the last century the popular mind was more and more influenced by the impression that science had settled these questions, and had decided that there was little, if any, place left for a Creator of the Universe. This impression was largely due to the opinions held by some biologists, and to this cause we may, I think, attribute the fact that the supposed conflict between science and religion was generally regarded very much more as a conflict between biology and religion than as a conflict between physics and religion. But as physics was not supposed to be antagonistic to religion, the facts of physics were, quite naturally, less pressed upon the attention of nonscientific persons than the opinions of some biologists, and thus it is not surprising that such persons should have come to believe that physics has nothing to contribute either constructively or destructively to religious thought. I felt that, in these circumstances, it might be profitable this afternoon to go over once more the ground covered by my PanAnglican paper, even at the risk of wearying those members of the Victoria Institute who may be familiar with the facts of science. I have, however, made some additions to that paper in the hope of making the argument clearer. I trust that I may be able to make it plain that the progress of science has made it very much more difficult than it was in the last century for men to profess materialistic views as to the world and its meaning. The change which has come about can hardly be described more vividly than in the following words used by Mr. Sidney Low.* He was writing with reference to psychical research, but the words apply almost without change to our subject. He says: "It is a curious sign of the times, the absorption of one eminent man of science after another in the problems of psychical research. It points, I suppose, to that feeling of the unsatisfactoriness of mere physical science when brought into relations with ethical, spiritual, and ontological questions. We are in the *The Standard, December, 1909. |