10 
more and more able to give expression to their thoughts their 
reason developed. He felt bound to raise the points he had done, 
because he found that recent writers on zoology and botany dis- 
tinctly took for granted the theory of spontaneous generation. The 
question—Can life be generated spontaneously or not? had been 
well sifted, and the most that could be said was that at present the 
theory rested upon no substantial basis whatever. 
The Rev. J. Burgess asked Mr. Walton if he could find any single 
sentence in the writings of Darwin in favour of the theory of spon- 
taneous generation. He (the speaker) believed that to be a doctrine 
which was not generally held by scientific men. 
Mr. Walton said he was speaking of the men who out-Darwined 
Darwin. 
Mr. Ullyett.—Most of the scientific men of the day are opposed 
to the theory of spontaneous generation. 
Mr. Walton said he had not altogether been giving his own views 
on this matter, hut he was merely stating the other side of the 
case. 
The Chairman thought it had been proved that there was no 
truth in the theory of spontaneous generation ; to him it seemed 
to be an impossibility and an absurdity, They must have a 
creative power ; and spontaneous generation would mean the denial 
of a Creator. 
The Rey. J. Burgess having quoted from the works of Darwin on 
the point, 
Dr. Tyson made a few remarks. In the first place, he wished to 
disagree with part of what Mr. Ullyett had said. Now, they should 
be very careful to say what they meant by development; and what 
they meant by growth. Surely, development had taken place 
throughout all ages, and was taking place now. Growth to an 
organ meant an addition to some body or animal of the same 
material of which it consisted. Development was something plus 
growth ; it meant something added by which the animal could do 
something he could not do before. If they accepted this definition, 
development had been going on and was still going on. And moral 
development must not be left out of the question If Darwinism 
had done nothing else it had brought out distinctly the advantage 
which accrued to man from recognising the importance of moral 
development. In dealing with the evolutionary theory of mankind, 
he took a distinct stand. He was going to suyport the so-called 
orthodox theory, because he did not believe in the extreme evolu- 
tionary ideas. ‘There were one or two things he had put down which 
he thought could uot be answered. Amongst the concessions of 
evolutionists the following were notorious. (1) That spontaneous 
generation must have occurred, or the doctrine of evolution, as held 
