10 



more and more able to give expression to tlieir thoughts their 

 reason developed. He felt bound to raise the points he had done, 

 because he found that recent writers on zoology and botany dis- 

 tinctly took for granted the theory of spontaneous generation. The 

 question — Can life be generated spontaneously or not ? had been 

 well sifted, and the most that could be said was that at present the 

 theory rested upon no substantial basis whatever. 



The Eev. J. Burgess asked Mr. Walton if he could find any single 

 sentence in the writings of Darwin in favour of the theory -of spon- 

 taneous generation. He (the speaker) believed that to be a doctrine 

 which was not generally held by scientific men. 



Mr. Walton said he was speaking of the men who out-Darwined 

 Darwin 



Mr. Ullyett. — Most of the scientific men of the day are opposed 

 to the theory of spontaneous generation. 



Mr. Walton said he had not altogether been giving his own views 

 on this matter, but he was merely stating tlie other side of the 

 case. 



The Chairman thought it had been proved that there was no 

 truth in the theory of spontaneous generation ; to him it seemed 

 to be an impossibility and an absurdity, They must have a 

 creative power ; and spontaneous generation would mean the denial 

 of a Creator. 



The Rev. J. Burgess having quoted from the works of Darwin on 

 the point. 



Dr. Tyson made a few remarks. In the first place, he wished to 

 disagree with part of what Mr. Ullyett had said. Now, they should 

 be very careful to say what they meant by development ; and what 

 they meant by growth. Surely, development had taken place 

 throughout all ages, and was taking place now. Growth to an 

 organ meant an addition to some body or animal of the same 

 material of which it consisted. Development was something plus 

 growth ; it meant something added by wliich the animal could do 

 something he could not do before. If they accepted this definition, 

 development had been going on and was still going on. And moral 

 development must not be left out of the question If Darwinism 

 had done nothing else it had brought out distinctly the advantage 

 which accrued to man from recognising the importance of moral 

 development. In dealing with the evolutionary theory of mankind, 

 he took a distiaet stand. He was going to support the so-called 

 orthodox theory, because he did not believe in the extreme evolu- 

 tionary ideas. There were one or two things he had put down which 

 he thought could not be answered. Amongst the concessions of 

 evolutionists the following were notorious. (1) That spontaneous 

 generation must have occurred, or the doctrine of evolution, as held 



