23 
paths as far as we can, and to be content with whatever discoveries 
we have then made, feeling sure that all will be devoid of mystery 
some day. 
And now with one more observation I will bring this lengthy 
paper to a close. The language in which some of our beliefs are 
couched is sometimes said by scientific men to be mysterious in 
itself, and in some cases unmeaning or even self-contradictory. 
Well, it may be so, or not. I am not about to defend it, only to 
say tu quoque. What do you think of the following endeavour to 
account for the twining movements of such plants as the Hop, 
Convolvulus, and others? Dr. Hooker states that ‘this twining 
habit is the effect of an inherent disposition in the tips of all elon- 
gating stems to bend successively towards all points of the com- 
pass.” (7). What a lucid explanation! A plant twines round a 
support because it has a tendency to turn to the north, east, south, 
and west successively! You will find many of the grand assertions 
of science as verbal as this. 
For simplicity of language let me commend to your notice the 
following explanation of Evolution. ‘It is the integration of 
matter and concomitant dissipation of motion, during which the 
matter passes from an indefinite, incoherent heterogeneity, and 
during which the retained motion undergoes a parallel transfor- 
mation.” (m). What can you have plainer, or more easy to be 
“‘understanded of the people,” than that? Or do you feel inclined 
to regard it as the darkening of knowledge by words? Then 
listen how the passage has been “done into English” by some 
one. ‘It is the joining of stuff into a lump, then the equal 
unjoining and sending out of movement from it, the making stuff 
pass from a no sort of unstickingness into some sort of holding- 
togetherness, while the movement not sent out undergoes a like 
change from no sort of keeping-togetherness into some sort of 
sticking.” 
Some of us perhaps may, after all, prefer the explanation of 
Evolution by another writer as simpler :— God said, let the earth 
bring forth the living creature after his kind.” But remember, 
that is not a scientific way of accounting for it. 
Dr. Eastes having made a few remarks at the close, was followed 
by Mr. H. Blanford, F.R.S., who wished to protest against what 
he considered a misrepresentation of the views of scientific men. 
' He also spoke at some length in favour of Evolution, bringing 
forward some very interesting illustrations of it. 
() Macmillan’s Science Primus, Botany, p. 33. 
(m) Spencer’s F’rst Principles, p. 396. 
