1 20 Protoplasm. 



could not itself exist for the benefit of the first 

 protoplasm that came into existence, is asserted 

 to be in precisely the same case with reference 

 to the one process as that of the electric spark 

 with reference to the other. And yet, in the 

 teeth of such passages, Mr. Huxley feels himself 

 at liberty to say now, 'Statement Number 2 

 is, in my judgment, absurd, and certainly I have 

 never said anything resembling if.' It is a pity 

 to see a man in the position of Mr. Huxley so 

 strangely forget himself! " 



On the third head Mr. Huxley's "mate- 

 rialism" Dr. Stirling's refutation is equally 

 conclusive, but at the same time, much too 

 elaborate to admit of quotation here. No 

 summary could do it justice ; it must be read 

 in its entirety. In this place, however, it does 

 not concern us. It lies outside the sphere of 

 our investigation. We are not now inquiring 

 what esoteric meaning may be attached by 

 Mr. Huxley to the language he has chosen to 

 employ ; nor even are we inquiring whether 

 that language is compatible with any such 

 meaning whatever. Our inquiry is much more 

 simple. It is limited to the question of fact. 

 Is it certain, is it demonstrable, is it scientifically 

 true that the facts of the case are as stated by 

 Mr. Huxley? On this very question of "mate- 



I 



