150 PROFESSOR EDWARD HULL, LL.D., F.R.S. 
evidence. It may be, on the other hand, that the inquirer 
will perceive the evidence to be weighty and substantial, in 
which case it behoves him to reconsider the supposition with 
which he started, that the conclusion was opposed to the 
teaching of Revelation.”* Lord Bacon has well observed 
that a little knowledge tends towards scepticism, but a fuller 
knowledge, disclosing the links by which all natural pheno- 
mena are bound together, induces men to recognise the 
agency of God in Nature; and if men will not recognise this 
agency thus disclosed, neither will they be persuaded though 
one rose from the dead to bear testimony to it.f 
The Prestpent.—I am sure all will heartily accord a vote of 
thanks to Professor Hull for his very valuable paper, and will only 
be sorry that a sudden summons to go to Canada, for which he has 
now sailed, has prevented him carrying out his intention of being 
present to-night. 
[A discussion, which was only of a general character, ensued, 
after which the meeting was then adjourned. | 
REMARKS ON THE FOREGOING PAPER. 
The Rev. W. R. Brackett, M.A., writes :—Professor Hull seems 
to dwell more on the negative side of his subject than on the 
positive. It is well that we should have the weakness of the 
Darwinian theory once more pointed out to us; but we might 
have liked to have had the force of the argument from design more 
fully stated in the two particulars chiefly dwelt upon. The 
reasoning founded on the fact of the introduction of life upon our 
globe seems to be not strictly an argument from design: rather 
it maintains that this introduction can only be accounted for on 
* Sir G. G. Stokes, Pres. R.S. Journ. of Trans. of Victoria Institute, 
Vol, xu, p: dy. 
+ The Westminster Review for November contains an Article, by Pro 
fessor Dewar, illustrating the way in which a man of science can some- 
times give the rein to his fancy when dealing with biological problems. 
