The President's Address. By L. 8. Beale, F.R.8. 191 



utterly distinct from that in which we use the word. This 

 is evident enough if we consider what is understood by the 

 " structure " of a crystal and the " structure " of an organ or tissue. 

 The first " structure " at once disappears when the crystal is dis- 

 solved and reappears whenever it is formed. The other structure 

 results, or, as some say, is evolved, only after many series of 

 changes of a very complex character have been completed. Once 

 destroyed, the structure of an organism can only be restored by a 

 long course of similar developmental processes. In fact, there is 

 not the faintest analogy between the structure of an organism and 

 the structure of a stone — the structure due to the operation of 

 living forces and the structure which is inherent with other 

 properties in non-living matter. 



2. There is the view supported by myself, and in favour of which 

 I have adduced evidence which I believe to be perfectly convincing, 

 that living matter has no definite structure whatever — that, in fact, 

 its particles, and very probably their constituent atoms, are in a 

 state of very active movement, which renders structure and fixity 

 of arrangement impossible — this active movement being an essen- 

 tial condition of the living state, which latter ceases when the 

 movement comes to a standstill. According to this view the idea 

 of structure as belonging to living matter is inconceivable. 



Now we know of no state in which non-living matter exhibits 

 any analogy with matter in the living state, so that the cause 

 of the state under consideration must have reference to the living 

 state, and to that only ; and to reassert, as many continue to do, 

 that the phenomena manifested by living matter are to be accounted 

 for by the properties of the material particles, is silly and perverse ; 

 and though the view of the peculiar nature of the vital power here 

 put forward and based upon a consideration of the phenomena of 

 living matter, may be ridiculed by materialists, every one who 

 thinks over the matter will see at once why this course is taken 

 by them. 



Professor Huxley, in his article " Biology," in the ' Encyclopaedia 

 Britannica ' — without defining what he means by the words " mole- 

 cular " and " machine " — assures his readers that " a mass of living 

 protoplasm is simply a molecular machine of great complexity, the 

 total results of the working of which, or its vital phenomena, 

 depend, on the one hand, upon its construction, and, on the 

 other, upon the energy supplied to it ; and to speak of vitality 

 as anything but the name of a series of operations, is as if one 

 should talk of the 'horologity' of a clock."* This is the sort 

 of teaching that has long retarded the progress of thought, 

 and affords an example of the puerile objections palmed off on 

 the public as scientific criticism, and supposed to be sufficient 

 * Huxley, Article " Biolo2;y," Encyc. Brit. 



p 2 



