238 
energy, an unequal distribution of temperature would bave 
been brought about, which is an imperative condition in order 
that the existing energy should be capable of being turned to 
useful account. 
I have thought it worth while to mention this curious specu- 
lation because it presents a picture, however fanciful in its 
conditions, of how the natural tendency of a natural law may 
be averted without any disturbance of the law itself, provided, 
and only provided, we superadd the idea of will guided by 
design. 
The Chairman (Mr. J. E. Howard, F.R.S.). — It is now my duty to call 
upon you to thank Professor Stokes for his able and interesting paper. It 
is enough for me to say that it does credit to his high position among the 
highest scientific minds of the age. His remarks in reference to the 
necessity of dwelling upon the idea of a designer, in order to comprehend 
design, remind me of the intercourse I had with one of the leading atheistic 
minds of the last generation, who, in his declining years, spent some time 
in my neighbourhood, and who, I am glad to say, died a true Christian, 
having by God’s mercy been brought from his aberrations to a better 
mind, — I allude to Mr. Hone, a well-known author. I remember once 
asking him whether, in his atheistic days, he really did believe in design 
without a designer : — and I may here say that I never met with a person 
of his views who would fairly grapple with this question ; and who would 
say he really did absolutely believe in what evidently bears the marks of 
design, and yet does not come from a designer. I cannot detail to you 
the answer Mr. Hone gave, because it opened out a very serious state of 
mind and thought, resembling what is now called Nihilism, and would lead 
us away from the present subject. He, however, did not believe in design 
without a designer, but had another explanation to give. His atheism was 
inconsistent with itself. 
Mr. J. Bateman, F.R.S. — I have been much struck with what Pro- 
fessor Stokes has said as to the comparatively safe position of the man 
who, uninfluenced by pantheistic abstractions, holds fast to the belief in a 
personal God. I confess I think that any one who does hold fast, in the 
strict and simple meaning of the term, to a personal God — including, of 
course, the idea of a personal Creator — has nothing to fear from the atheistic 
or pantheistic tendencies of the age. I know not how others feel or what 
their experiences may have been, but as my own experience ranges over 
nearly seventy years, I may be allowed to say how much I have been 
struck by the changes in public opinion, especially in the opinions of scientists 
on religious questions during this period. The satirist of the last century 
spoke of the scientists of his time taking the a priori road and arguing 
downwards till they began to doubt of God. But the case is precisely the 
