CONCERNING LIVING AND DEAD. 69 



question to be influenced by those who believed such 

 things, than I could allow the conclusions I have been 

 taught to believe concerning gravitation to be completely 

 subverted, by one who professes to believe that chairs and 

 tables move about and rap out intelligible answers to in- 

 telligent or stupid questions. The answer to the modern 

 advocate of the doctrine of spontaneous generation, is the 

 same as to the ancient heterogenist, " your observations are 

 inconclusive and you have been mistaken in the facts upon 

 which you place implicit reliance. You have been deceived 

 by appearances. You have interpreted the results of 

 experiments and observations in one way, but they will 

 receive a very different interpretation as soon as they shall 

 have been carefully repeated and thoroughly studied by 

 other observers." 



Speculations concerning Living and Dead. I must again 

 direct the reader's attention to the views entertained upon 

 the question of what happens when a living thing ceases to 

 live. In other words, what is the exact difference between a 

 very simple organism just before it dies and just after its 

 death has occurred ? The living machine, it has been said, 

 is matter and force. Has the dead machine been deprived 

 of either ? But the question, like many other questions, is 

 only answered by those who boast of the exactness of their 

 knowledge with the help of the most rough and thoroughly 

 misleading metaphor. In the living thing we are told that 

 the " fires " are burning brightly ; in the dead one it is said 

 the fires are out and there is no water in the boiler. The 

 modern Epicurean philosopher, like mVancient prototype, 

 could, of course, relight the fires and put more water in the 

 boiler. But one touch of his magic wand and the fire 



