IV 



YEAST 135 



believed, and to understand before it criticised 

 Dr. Stirling winds up his paper with the following 

 paragraph : 



&quot;In short, the whole position of Mr. Huxley, (1) that all 

 organisms consist alike of the same life-matter, (2) which life- 

 matter is, for its part, due only to chemistry, must be pro 

 nounced untenable nor less untenable (3) the materialism he 

 would found on it.&quot; 



The paragraph contains three distinct assertions 

 concerning my views, and just the same number of 

 utter misrepresentations of them. That which I 

 have numbered (1) turns on the ambiguity of the 

 word &quot; same,&quot; for a discussion of which I would 

 refer Dr. Stirling to a great hero of &quot;Aufkl&rung,&quot; 

 Archbishop Whately; statement number (2) is, 

 in my judgment, absurd, and certainly I have never 

 said anything resembling it ; while, as to number 

 (3), one great object of my essay was to show that 

 what is called &quot; materialism &quot; has no sound philo 

 sophical basis ! 



As we have seen, the study of yeast has led in 

 vestigators face to face with problems of immense 

 interest in pure chemistry, and in animal and 

 vegetable morphology. Its physiology is not less 

 rich in subjects for inquiry. Take, for example, 

 the singular fact that yeast will increase indefin 

 itely when grown in the dark, in water containing 

 only tartrate of ammonia, a small percentage of 

 mineral salts, and sugar. Out of these materials 

 the Tor-nice will manufacture nitrogenous proto- 



