724 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



able in itself, though it has, in comparison with the views of others, 

 the somewhat rare merit of being not inconsistent with his notions 

 concerning the experiments of to-day. He does not reject the super- 

 natural in the past, while resorting to it for the present — he resorts to 

 it in the present and in the past alike, and curiously evades the prob- 

 lem of origin altogether. 



Since so little — or, rather, nothing — is said by Prof. Huxley in 

 support of his supposition that living matter does not originate in the 

 present day, even though the process of origination is so closely akin 

 to that of growth ; and, though the process of growth is taking place 

 at every moment of our lives, in every region of the globe, and under 

 the most varied conditions — amid tropical heat and icy coldness, on 

 mountain-tops and deep down in almost unfathomable ocean-beds — it 

 seems only reasonable to suppose that he must have been influenced by 

 some prepossessions. And, so far as one can gather from his presi- 

 dential address before the British Association — from which I have 

 already quoted — he does not appear to have been powerfully biased 

 by theoretical considerations. One of these we shall now consider. 



Much stress is laid by certain writers upon the fact that " the doc- 

 trine of spontaneous or equivocal generation has been chased succes- 

 sively to lower and lower stations in the world of organized beings, as 

 our means of investigation have improved." * So that, as another 

 very eminent writer says, "if some apparent exceptions still exist, 

 they are of the lowest and simplest forms." 2 And it is usually inferred 

 from this fact that further knowledge and improved means of obser- 

 vation will prove these apparent exceptions to be no exceptions to the 

 supposed general rule — omne vivum ex vivo. A consideration of this 

 kind seems to have powerfully influenced Prof. Huxley. But much 

 confusion exists in reference to the point, which needs to be removed. 

 In the first place, it must be freely admitted that many ancient no- 

 tions, dating from the time of Aristotle, on the subject of " Equivocal 

 or Spontaneous Generation," were altogether crude and absurd. Sec- 

 ondly, it is necessary to distinguish (and Prof. Huxley did so) between 

 two meanings of the phrase, which have often been confounded with 

 one another — viz., between Heterogenesis, or the mere allotropic modi- 

 fication of already existing living matter, and Archebiosis, or the inde- 

 pendent origination of living matter. Thirdly, it should be distinctly 

 understood that those who strictly adhere to the Evolution hypothesis 

 could never believe in the origination of any but the " lowest and 

 simplest " organic forms by a process of Archebiosis. So that, as 

 Prof. Huxley professes himself an Evolutionist, the objection above 

 indicated should have been quite pointless for him. Molecular com- 

 binations, giving rise to units of protoplasm far below the minimum 



1 Prof. Lister, "Introductory Lecture" (University of Edinburgh), 1869, p. 12. 

 3 Mr. Justice Grove ("Presidential Address"), Report of British Association for the 

 Advancement of Science, 1866, p. 71. 



