APPENDIX. 



239 



that in some way or another they result from the properties of 

 the component elements of the water. We do not assume that 

 a something called ' aquosity ' entered into and took possession 

 of the oxide of hydrogen as soon as it was formed, and then 

 guided the aqueous particles to their places in the facets of the 

 crystal or amongst the leaflets of the hoar-frost. On the con- 

 trary, we live in the hope and in the faith that by the advance 

 of molecular physics we shall by and by be able to see our way 

 as clearly from the constituents of water to the properties of 

 water as we are now able to deduce the operations of a watch 

 from the form of its parts and the manner in which they are 

 put together. Is the case in any way changed when carbonic 

 acid, water, and ammonia disappear, and in their place, under the 

 influence of jyre-existing living jnvtoplasjn, an equivalent weight 

 of the matter of life makes its appearance 1 It is true that there 

 is no sort of parity between the properties of the components 

 and the properties of the resultant, but neither was there in the 

 case of the water. It is also true that what I have spoken of 

 as the influence of pre-existing matter is something quite unin- 

 telligible ; but does any one quite comprehend the modus 

 operandi of an electric spark which traverses a mixture of 

 oxygen and hydrogen 1 What justification is there, then, for the 

 assumption of the existence in the living matter of a something 

 which has no representative or correlative in the not living 

 matter which gave rise to it % What better philosophical status 

 has ' vitality 'than ' aquosity 1'" 



This reasoning, on a first perusal, looks lucid and convincing ; 

 but I think a thorough examination will show that its apparent 

 lucidity is produced by leaving out the difficulties of the 

 question. 



The analogy of a watch really makes against Huxley's argu- My reply 

 ment. It is true that we are " able to deduce the operations of ^° '*• 

 a watch from the form of its parts, and the manner in which 

 they are put together ; " and it may be true, for anything I have 

 to say to the contrary, that if we understood an organism as 

 well as we understand a watch, and if we understood life as 

 well as we understand mechanics, we should be able to deduce 

 the properties of living beings from those of carbonic acid, 

 water, and ammonia. But here, where Huxley takes a paral- 

 lelism for granted, there is really a wide divergence ; for the 

 living matter, wliicli is chiefly formed of combinations of 



