not only orders me to make, but makes himself. Very curious all this, then. When I do what he bids me do, when I say what he says-that if ammonia, etc., are due to chemistry, protoplasm is also due to chemistry-Mr. Huxley turns round and calls out that I am saying an 'absurdity,' which he, for his part, 'certainly never said!' But let me make just one other quotation :

"When hydrogen and oxygen are mixed in a certain proportion, and an electric spark is passed through them, they disappear, and a quantity of water equal in weight to the sum of their weights appears in their place.'

"Now, no one in his senses will dispute that this is a question of chemistry, and of nothing but chemistry; but it is Mr. Huxley himself who asks in immediate and direct reference here:

“Is the case in any way changed when carbonic acid, water, and ammonia disappear, and in their place, under the influence of pre-existing living protoplasm, an equivalent weight of the matter of life makes its appearance?'

"Surely Mr. Huxley has no object whatever here but to place before us the genesis of protoplasm, and surely also this genesis is a purely chemical one! The very influence of preexisting living protoplasm,'—which pre-existence

could not itself exist for the benefit of the first protoplasm that came into existence,-is asserted. to be in precisely the same case with reference to the one process as that of the electric spark with reference to the other. And yet, in the teeth of such passages, Mr. Huxley feels himself at liberty to say now, 'Statement Number 2 is, in my judgment, absurd, and certainly I have never said anything resembling it. It is a pity to see a man in the position of Mr. Huxley so strangely forget himself!"

On the third head-Mr. Huxley's "materialism"-Dr. Stirling's refutation is equally conclusive, but at the same time, much too elaborate to admit of quotation here. No summary could do it justice; it must be read in its entirety. In this place, however, it does not concern us. It lies outside the sphere of our investigation. We are not now inquiring what esoteric meaning may be attached by Mr. Huxley to the language he has chosen to employ; nor even are we inquiring whether that language is compatible with any such meaning whatever. Our inquiry is much more simple. It is limited to the question of fact. Is it certain, is it demonstrable, is it scientifically true that the facts of the case are as stated by Mr. Huxley? On this very question of "mate

I

rialism," for instance, Mr. Huxley asserts that "all vital action" is but "the result of the molecular forces" of the physical basis; and consequently, to use his own words when addressing his Edinburgh audience, "the thoughts to which I am now giving utterance, and your thoughts regarding them, are but the expression of molecular changes in that matter of life which is the source of our other vital phenomena." With these words in their recollection, few persons would be disposed to differ from Mr. Huxley when he says that "most undoubtedly the terms of his propositions are distinctly materialistic."

But are they true?

"I know of no form of negation sufficiently explicit, comprehensive, and emphatic in which to reply to this question." The doctrines of Scientific Materialism, as above stated, in Professor Huxley's own words, are "so utterly at variance with the most familiar facts of chemistry that it is marvellous they should have so long passed unchallenged." 1

1. To enter into detail. It is in no sense true

1 "Unchallenged, that is," adds Dr. Elam, " on purely chemical grounds. On other issues, both relevant and irrelevant, they have been often objected to."

that protoplasm "breaks up

"breaks up" (as Professor Huxley says it does)1 into carbonic acid, water, and ammonia, any more than it is true that iron, when exposed to the action of oxygen, "breaks up" into oxide of iron. A compound body can break up only into its constituent parts; and these are not the constituent parts of protoplasm. "To convert protoplasm into these three compounds requires an amount of oxygen nearly double the weight of the original mass of protoplasm; speaking approximately, every 100 lbs. of protoplasm would require 170 lbs. of oxygen."

2. "Under certain conditions," says Professor Huxley, whereas, in point of fact, under no possible "conditions" can carbonic acid, water, and ammonia, when brought together, "give rise to the still more complex body protoplasm." "Not even on paper can any multiple, or any combination whatever of these substances, be

breaks up

into car

1 "The matter of life bonic acid, water, and ammonia, which certainly possess no properties but those of ordinary matter." (Professor Huxley, in The Fortnightly Review, February, 1869.)

2 "But when they [the "lifeless compounds" carbonic acid, water, and ammonia] are brought together, under certain conditions, they give rise to the still more complex body protoplasm, and this protoplasm exhibits the phenomena of life.” (Ibid.)

made to represent the composition of protoplasm; much less can it be effected in practice. Carbonic acid (CO2), water (H, O), and ammonia (NH), cannot by any combination be brought to represent C H26 N4 O10, which is the equivalent of protein or protoplasm.

36

3. "But the most incredible of all the errors, if it be not simply a mystification, is found in the comparison between the formation of water from its elements and the origination of protoplasm. Hydrogen and oxygen doubtless unite to form an equivalent weight of water; that is, an amount of water equalling in weight the combined weights of the hydrogen and the oxygen; and Professor Huxley asks, 'Is the case in any way changed when carbonic acid, water, and ammonia disappear, and in their place, under the influence of pre-existing protoplasm, an equivalent weight of the matter of life makes its appearance?'

"The answer is, Certainly; the case is changed in every possible way in which a process, whether chemical or otherwise, can be changed. But it must also be premised that the fact as stated is not true, that when these three substances disappear, under certain conditions, an 'equivalent weight of the matter of life makes its appearance.' Every chemist