( 55 ) 127 



and preexisting protoplasm are, in their relative places, 

 not on the same chemical level this is the main point 

 for us to see ; and Mr. Huxley's allusion to our igno- 

 rance must not be allowed to blind us to it. Here we 

 have in a glass vessel so much hydrogen and oxygen, 

 into which we discharge an electric spark, and water is 

 the result. Now what analogy is it possible to perceive 

 between this production of water by external experi- 

 ment and the production of protoplasm by protoplasm ? 

 The discrepancy is so palpable that it were impertinent 

 to enlarge on it. The truth is just this, that the meas- 

 ured and mixed gases, the vessel, and the spark, in the 

 one case, are as unlike the fortuitous food, the living 

 organs, and the long process of assimilation in the 

 other case, as the product water is unlike the product 

 protoplasm. No ; that the action of the electric spark 

 should be unknown, is no reason why we should not in- 

 sist on protoplasm for protoplasm, on life for life. Pro- 

 toplasm can only be produced by protoplasm, and each 

 of all the innumerable varieties of protoplasm, only by 

 its own kind. For the protoplasm of the worm we 

 must go to the worm, and for that of the toad-stool to 

 the toad-stool. In fact, if all living beings come from 

 protoplasm, it is quite as certain that, but for living be- 

 ings, protoplasm would disappear. Without an egg you 

 cannot have a hen that is true ; but it is equally true 

 that, without a hen, you cannot have an egg. So in 

 protoplasm ; which, consequently, in the production of 

 itself, offers no analogy to the production, or precipita- 

 tion by the electric spark, not of itself, but of water. 

 Besides, if for protoplasm, preexisting protoplasm, is 

 always necessary, how was there ever a first proto- 

 plasm ? 



