; Monthly Mi ical 
230 PROGRESS OF MICROSCOPICAL SCIENCE. JOUTDAl, OcE 1, 1870, 
determined upon combining the two treatments for the purpose of 
guarding against the secondary symptoms, with what he might*term 
the chemical treatment recommended by Mr. Crookes. The result 
was (continued Mr. Hope) that, “ while every single animal that I did 
not take charge of either died or was slaughtered, I succeeded in 
saving every single animal that I did take charge of.” Mr. Hope 
also recorded some cases of small-pox among his children by no means 
So decisive. 
Professor Hualey on Pennicilium Torula and Bacterium.—Among 
the various papers read at the meeting of the British Association was 
one by Professor Huxley, which we should like to have heard, and 
of which most imperfect abstracts have been given. It was on the 
above subject. The author stated that what he wished to do was to 
give some idea of what he imagined to be the relations of those dif- 
ferent organisms, and to call attention to some very remarkable cir- 
cumstances connected with their mode of life and growth. “ Professor 
Huxley, aided by diagrams drawn upon the blackboard as he proceeded, 
communicated what were most interesting facts regarding the minute 
organisms which formed the subject of his address, leaving out allusion 
to the labours of others in the same field.” At the close of the address 
a discussion followed, in which Professor Balfour and Drs. Sanderson 
and Bastian took part. Professor Balfour remarked that the address 
was a most important addition to knowledge on the subject treated. 
“There was, however, a divergence of opinion between one or two of 
the speakers and Professor Huxley, which led Mr. Belcher, a gentle- 
man who said he was a learner, to complain of a want of unanimity 
between scientific men, and to suggest, with regard to the question of 
spontaneous generation, that they should meet and have experiments 
which would be indisputable. Professor Huxley regretted with Mr. 
Belcher that everything could not be settled at once, and said he did 
not think that the British Association was likely to die out by the speedy 
accomplishment of the consummation desired by Mr. Belcher. Pro- 
fessor Huxley also, in reply to some statements made, said that in his 
experience, having raised a fluid to the point of ebullition, he had 
never—although he had repeated the experiment times out of mind— 
seen the slightest indication of the movement which he had distin- 
guished as the vital movement. If others had seen it, that of course 
destroyed the value of what he said, but unless they had discriminated 
very carefully between the vital movement and the mechanical move- 
ment which was continually going on, he should still venture to think 
that nobody had seen the vital movement in a boiling infusion, opened 
within two or three days after the boiling had taken place; for the 
longer delay there might be, the greater were the chances of cracks in 
the vessel, imperfect fastening.” Of course, at present it is impossible 
to offer our opinion on Professor Huxley’s paper. We hope, however, 
in our next to lay the facts more fully before our readers. We have 
only been able to obtain a most imperfect report of the proceedings 
of the Association. 
Fermentation and Microscopy—Dr. Angus Smith, in commenting 
