19 



only difference is a difference in the rate or degree of activity 

 of the molecular mechanisms of which matter dead and matter 

 roasted and boiled, living, not living, of every kind and form, 

 and in every state, is composed. The matter which consists 

 of molecular mechanisms includes, of course, simple and com- 

 pound substances. Iron, oxygen, a particle of roast mutton, 

 and a particle of living matter, are all included in one 

 category. All consist, according to Professor Huxley, of 

 molecular mechanisms ; but the molecular mechanisms of some 

 of these things must consist of more elements than those of 

 others, and the mechanisms of the living protoplasm are surely 

 capable of movements of a character totally different from 

 those of the oxygen.' Moreover, it is certainly remarkable 

 that the molecular mechanisms of all forms of "protoplasm" 

 should contain the same four elements. By abstracting one 

 or more of these, the molecular mechanisms of protoplasm 

 would be destroyed, and yet molecular mechanisms of some 

 kind or other would remain. Mr. Huxley does not tell us how 

 we are to distinguish the simple molecular mechanisms from 

 compound molecular mechanisms, nor how the molecular 

 mechanisms of a simple substance like lead differ from those 

 of a compound like his protoplasm. It would seem that the 

 molecular mechanisms of lead are, according to this hypothesis, 

 as much alive as the molecular mechanisms of living proto- 

 plasm, but that the latter are more active than the former. 

 They differ in degree, but not in kind. 



Professor Huxley must surely have formed a rather low 

 estimate of the intelligence and critical power of the medical 

 profession, to expect them to be convinced by him that the 

 only difference between living matter and non-living matter, 

 is a difference of degree. He asserts that there are compli- 

 cated movements in the matter of which all living and all 

 non-living matter consists. And without one word of expla- 

 nation as to what he means, he tells an audience, consisting of 

 highly-educated men from every part of the world, that " the 

 microcosm repeats the macrocosm, and that one chain of 

 causation connects the nebulous original of suns and planetary 

 systems with the protoplasmic foundation of life and organisa- 

 tion." Is thought, I would ask, to be silenced by such 

 nebulous nonsense as this ? So i'ar from anything like a 

 chain of causation having been shown, not two links. oi such 

 supposed chain have yet been discovered. But the whole chain 

 of* causation which connects nebulous originals of suns and 

 planets with protoplasmic foundations is of so nebulous 

 a nature that it scarcely deserves notice. " The microcosm 

 repeats the macrocosm," says Professor Huxley ; but the more 



