185 
without offence, a little incident connected with your indefatigable secretary, 
to whom I am indebted for a hint upon which I have now acted. I 
received from him a few days ago a letter, saying that he hoped I would say 
something this evening. In consenting, I added that I was undecided as to 
a subject to comment upon, and communicated to him that letter from my 
Indian friends, asking him to take the necessary steps. Next morning I was 
somewhat surprised to receive my Indian letter back again; but with it I 
found one suggesting that the letter seemed most opportunely to afford a 
subject for remark. I have now great pleasure in moving that the thanks 
of this meeting be given to Mr. Howard for his most admirable address. 
(Cheers.) 
Mr. II. C adman Jones. — I have much pleasure in seconding the resolution. 
Although a comparatively idle member myself, never having read a paper 
before the Institute, yet I am very much obliged to those who do labour in 
our interests. 
The resolution was then unanimously agreed to. 
Mr. Howard. — I thank you very much for your patience in listening to an 
address on a subject which, although treated rather seriously, could not have 
been dealt with otherwise than in the light of my own experience ; and I 
have done this in the hope that it might be useful to others. 
Rev. Prebendary Irons, D.D. — I am glad to have the honour of moving a 
vote of thanks to you, Sir, for your services as Chairman to-night, and, I am 
justified in adding, for the great service you have rendered to the Institute 
ever since its foundation. We are all grateful to you for having endeavoured 
to preserve throughout the real character of this Institute. Your papers 
have been philosophical, but they have not been put forward in advocacy of 
any special aspect of Christianity. We recognize very strongly that though 
you had views of your own and did not attempt to conceal them, you did not 
give them that undue prominence which, in this Institute, would be wholly 
unfair to others. Now, that I apprehend to be our duty. We feel as 
members, and particularly as philosophers, that we should do much harm to 
the Institute if we allowed it to be thought that we met here in a spirit 
of antagonism to science. Undoubtedly our object is to ascertain the truth, 
whatever that truth may be. We accept it, not reluctantly, but cheerfully 
and thankfully. We love it because it is the truth ; aud if, for the time being, it 
seems to clash with what we thought to be our Christianity, we are willing, 
either to wait until we know better, or, perhaps, to doubt whether our notion 
of Christianity may not have some flaw in it. Unless we meet in that spirit 
of entire fairness, we shall not be able to hold together. We are all aware 
that in this Institute there is a vast variety of Christian opinion. It would 
be entirely wrong to conceal the fact, that we are all here on a philosophical 
and scientific basis common to us all, and that we are not here to fight for any 
* 
