14 Proceedtnga. 



AUCKLAND INSTITUTE. 



First Meeting: l?fh May, 1910. 

 Dr. R. Briffavilt, President, in the cliair. 



New Members. — A. Buchanan, A. W. Chatfield, J. Coe, A. B. Harding, 

 \i. Cranwell, Hallyburton Johnstone, W. Satchell, Rev. W. Trotter, R. M. 

 Wilson. 



Professor H. W. Segar, M.A., delivered a lecture on •' Halley"s 

 Comet." 



After describing the general features of comets, and the views held by astro- 

 nomers respecting them, the lecturer gave a full account of the previous visits of 

 Halley's Comet. He then described Halley's great discovery of 1705, in which, 

 as the result of calculation and observation, he predicted that the comet was 

 periodic, and followed a regular orbit contained within the limits of the solar 

 system. In this Halley made one of the first applications of the knowledge given 

 to the world in Newton's " Principia." The peculiarities of the orbit of Halley's 

 Comet, as compared with those of other comets, were then dealt with, and the 

 path followed by it during its present visit was described, its position at various 

 times being compared with that of the Earth. The lecture was copiously illus- 

 trated with limelight views and diagrams. 



As the hall proved much too small to accommodate the audience, the 

 lecture was repeated, with slight alterations, on the 23rd May. 



Second Meeting : Gtlt June, 1910. 



D]-. R. Briffault, Piesident, in the chair. 



Ne^v Member. — R. J. Morgan. 



The President delivered the aniiiversai-v address, taking as his sub- 

 ject " The Nature of Life." 



The lecturer explained the mechanical theory of life, and contrasted it with 

 the old theory of vitalism. The latter was, he said, inconsistent with the prin- 

 ciple of the conservation of energy, and of the equivalence of forces. It was 

 noteworthy, nevertheless, that in many quarters dissatisfaction had of late been 

 expressed with the mechanical theory, and that many biologists displayed a 

 tendency to return to vitalism in some modified form. Among the causes of this 

 tendency were the fact that the mechanical theory did not supply an interpreta- 

 tion of the distinction between living and non-living matter, and that the ideal 

 of the theory — the reduction of living processes to terms of physics and chemistry — 

 had not in any instance been achieved. The nu'chnnical tlicoiy originally regarded 

 life as the property of a chemical compound, protoplasm. That view, however, 

 was negatived by the fact that perpetual change of chemiciil composition is a 



