EVOLUTION AND THE ORIGIN OF LIFE. 719 



tions. ... It is therefore consistent with the hypothesis of Evolu- 

 tion to admit a variety of origins or starting-points." In this paper 

 Mr. Lewes distinctly postulates the probability of a repetition of the 

 process of Archebiosis, wherever the conditions were favorable, and 

 though he says nothing against the continuance of such a process in 

 the present day, neither does he dwell upon it as a probability. 



Prof. Huxley's l opinions on the subject of Archebiosis are very 

 similar to those of Mr. Spencer, with the exception that he seems more 

 strongly opposed to the notion of its occurrence at the present day, 

 and it is to this aspect of the question that I would now direct the 

 reader's attention. Why should men of such acknowledged eminence 

 in matters of Philosophy and Science as Mr. Herbert Spencer and 

 Prof. Huxley promulgate a notion which seems to involve an arbitrary 

 infringement of the uniformity of Nature ? 



They would both have us believe that living matter came into be- 

 ing by the operation of natural causes — that is, by the unhindered play 

 of natural affinities operating in and upon matter which had already 

 acquired a certain degree of molecular complexity. They believe that 

 the simpler kinds of mineral and crystalline matter continue to come 

 into being now as they have ever done ; nay, more, they believe that 

 the higher kind of matter, originally initiated by the operation of nat- 

 ural causes, continues to grow both in animal and in vegetal forms, 

 solely under similar influences, and yet they consider themselves justi- 

 fied in supposing that natural causes are now no longer able indepen- 

 dently to initiate this higher kind of matter (protoplasm). We find 

 Prof. Tyndall 3 also affirming, in the most unhesitating language, the 

 ultimate similarity between crystalline and living matter: affirm- 

 ing that all the various structures by which the two kinds of matter 

 may be represented are equally the " results of the free play of the 

 forces of the atoms and molecules " entering into their composition. 

 And he, too, would have us believe that, while differences in degree 

 of molecular complexity alone separate living from not-living matter, 

 the physical agencies which promote the growth of living matter are 

 now incapable of causing its origination. 



Why, we may fairly ask, should a supposed difference be erected 

 by Evolutionists between Origination and Growth in the case of livino- 

 matter, while no one dreams of making any such distinction in refer- 

 ence to crystalline matter? Is it true that the process of growth dif- 

 fers from the process of origination, and if so in what respects ? Philo- 

 sophically speaking there is little difference. Take the case of the 

 formation of the " silver tree," cited by Prof. Tyndall. A weak 

 galvanic current is passed through a solution of nitrate of silver, and 

 simultaneously, in a first increment of time, a number of molecules of 



1 "Inaugural Address at Meeting of British Association," Nature, September 15, 18*70, 

 p. 404. 



2 "Fragments of Science," fourth edition (1872), pp. 85-87, and 113-119. 



