ZOOLOGY AND BOTANY, MICROSCOPY, ETC. 723 



demonstrably not living can be, without the aid of organisms already 

 living, endowed with the properties of life. 



Judged of hastily and apart from the facts, it may appear to some 

 minds that an origin of life from not-life, by sheer physical law, 

 would be a great philosophical gain, an indefinitely strong support 

 of the doctrine of evolution. If this were so, and indeed so far as it 

 is believed to be so, it would speak and does speak volumes in favour 

 of the spirit of science pervading our age. For although the vast 

 majority of biologists in Europe and America accept the doctrine of 

 evolution, they are almost unanimous in their refusal to accept, as in 

 any sense competent, the reputed evidence of ' spontaneous genera- 

 tion ' : which demonstrates at least, that what is sought by our leaders 

 in science is not the mere support of hypotheses, cherished though 

 they may be, but the truth, the uncoloured truth, from nature. But 

 it must be remembered that the present existence of what has been 

 called ' spontaneous generation,' the origin of life de novo to-day by 

 physical law, is by no means required by the doctrine of evolution. 

 Prof. Huxley, for example, says, ' If all living beings have been 

 evolved from pre-existing forms of life, it is enough that a single par- 

 ticle of protoplasm should once have appeared upon the globe, as the 

 result of no matter what agency ; any further independent formation 

 of protoplasm would be sheer waste.' And why ? we may ask. 

 Because one of the most marvellous and unique properties of proto- 

 plasm, and the living forms built out of it, is the power to multiply 

 indefinitely and for ever ! 



What need, then, of spontaneous generation ? A locomotive on 

 a great journey, that is specifically endowed with the power to 

 generate its own steam, surely does not need stationary engines placed 

 all along the line to generate steam for it. It is certainly true that 

 evidence has been adduced purporting to support, if not establish, 

 the origin in dead matter of the least and lowest forms of life. But 

 it evinces no prejudice to say that it is inefiicient. For a moment 

 study the facts. The organisms which were used to test the point at 

 issue were those known as septic. The vast majority of these are 

 inexpressibly minute. The smallest of them, indeed, is so small that 

 50 millions of them, if laid in order, would only fill the one-hun- 

 dredth part of a cubic inch. Many are relatively larger, but all are 

 supremely minute. Now, these organisms are universally present 

 in enormous numbers, and ever rapidly increasing — in all moist 

 putrefaction over the surface of the globe." Referring to an experiment 

 made with a few shreds of fish muscle and brain in pure water, and 

 which in a brief space gave rise to a multitude of many living and 

 moving organisms, Dr. Dallinger asked, " How did these organisms 

 arise ? The water was pure ; they wcro not discoverable in the 

 fresh muscle of fish. Yet in a dozen hours the vessel of water is 

 peopled with hosts of individual forms which no mathematics could 

 number ! How did they arise — from universally diffused eggs, or 

 from the direct physical change of dead matter into living forms ? 



Twelve years ago the life-histories of these forms were unknown. 

 We did not know biologically how they developed. And yet with 



