554 KEPOET— 1882. 



Section D.— BIOLOGY. 

 Pkesident of the Section — Professor Gamgee, M.D., F.R.S. 



DEPARTMENT OF ANATOMY AND PHYSIOLOGY. 



THURSDAY, AUGUST 24. 



The President delivered the following Address : — 



On the Growth of our Knoivledge of the Function of Secretion, to which is 

 prefixed a Brief Sketch of the Writings of the late Professor Francis 

 Maitland Balfour. 



"WwES the Council of the British Association did me the honour of asking me to 

 preside over this Section, it occurred to me that a suitable subject for the presidential 

 address would be a Survey of the Growth of our Knowledge oi the Function of Secre- 

 tion ; for no subject, which has recently been the object of minute study by animal 

 physiologists, is more likely to interest all devoted to biological pursuits, however 

 diverse. I accordingly propose to direct your attention, for the greater part of 

 the time at our disposal to-day, to what appear to me to be the most important and 

 the most interesting of the researches bearing on this subject. 



Before, however, entering upon the proper subject of this address, it would ill 

 become me as president of this Section were I not to speak to you, however imper- 

 fectly, of two great losses which we have sustained, and which have saddened, and 

 still sadden, the hearts of many of us. The year 1882 will long be memorable, and 

 sadly memorable, as a year during which English biology sustained irreparable 

 losses. So much has lately been written' concerning that veteran in science, Charles 

 Darwin, who will figure in the history of the human intellect with such men as 

 Socrates and Newton, that I feel no words of mine are needed to add to your 

 sentiments of admiration and respect. He has made for himself an imperishable re- 

 putation as one of the subtlest, most patient, and most truthful observers of natural 

 phenomena. His powers as an observer were, however, almost surpassed by his 

 ingenuity as a reasoner, and his power to frame the hypotheses most apt, in the actual 

 state of science, to reconcile all the facts which came within the range of his 

 observation. We remember the time when the name of Charles Darwin, and the 

 mention of the theories connected with his name, awakened, on the part of many, 

 sentiments of antagonism and of unreasonable opposition. But we have Uved to 

 witness, what I may term, a great reparation. Even those who did not know the 

 man, and the qualities of mind and heart which endeared him to so many, have 

 come to recognise that in his work he was actuated by a single-hearted desire 

 to discover the truth ; and, after calm reflection, they have conceded that his studies 

 and his views. Tike all studies and all views which are based upon the truth, not 

 only are notu-reconcilable with, but add to our conceptions of, the dignity and glory 

 of God. And here I may be allowed to remark that it is impossible to study the 

 writings of Darwin, and especially the one in which he treats of ' The Descent of 

 Man,' without recognising an undercurrent of reverent sentiment, which in one or 

 two places finds expression m words telling us that man differs from the animal 

 creation, if not in physical characteristics which cannot be bridged over, at least 

 in moral attributes and iij the ' ennobling belief in God,' by his power of forming 



I 



