10 
tific view. I apprehend that the one object of this Society is to show that 
the reasonably religious view of the Universe is substantially the same as 
the truly scientific view. (Hear, hear.) Therefore I very much welcome 
the statement that the Council is trying to circulate, in large numbers, the 
“ People’s Edition ” of the Transactions of the Society, because it tells us 
amongst other things the real object of the Society, and will lead people to 
understand what that object is, namely, to show that science is the hand- 
maid of religion, and is always by all reasonable and religious people treated 
as such. If I might venture to make one suggestion in moving this reso- 
lution, it would be a propos of what has already been brought out as to the 
circulation of our transactions in foreign parts. I think that that circulation 
will be most valuable in India (hear, hear), and I have no doubt that all 
who know anything of India will agree with me on this point. It is unhappily 
the case that the faith of the educated natives is being gradually undermined. 
We have taught them that their own faith is worthless and groundless, 
and have given them nothing effectual in its place. We have left them 
to suppose that Christianity is what it was called by a high official not long 
ago in a pamphlet circulated amongst the educated natives of India, — u the 
divided and decaying creed of Europe.” When this is the case, it is 
valuable that the Papers of such a Society as this should be sent out to 
show that on strictly scientific grounds our religion is to be maintained. 
(Hear, hear.) I hope the Council will turn their attention towards the 
claims of our fellow subjects in India upon this point. I will not detain 
the Society by any further observations, but will simply move the resolu- 
tion that has been put into my hands. 
Rev. C. F. Deems, D.D. (of New York). — My lord, ladies and 
gentlemen, — I am aware of the proprieties of the occasion and of the intense 
interest with which you are looking for the Address about to be delivered 
by the right rev. prelate who is to follow me, and I shall therefore occupy 
your time but a few moments — indeed, I esteem it a great privilege to do 
so for one minute. It might, perhaps, be said, “ It is all very well to call 
on a gentleman from America — three thousand miles away — to second a 
resolution which praises the conduct of the officers of a Society meeting in 
London ; ” but that joke, like many another we are accustomed to hear, 
falls before the fact, and the fact is that you have an Honorary Secretary 
who is so indefatigable, that I really believe there are more people in 
America who, month by month, know of the proceedings of the Victoria 
Institute than you can find in the City of London. (Hear, hear.) I 
therefore have great pleasure, on behalf of my friends and associates in 
America, in seconding this resolution. The ideas which I had thrown 
together for this occasion have been stolen by the speakers who preceded 
me. I was going to allude to the remarkable moral phenomenon which has 
come up in our day. There was a time when men who rejected the 
doctrine of a personal God, and who rejected the doctrine of a revealed 
book, were content to do so and to stay there. They did not move; 
they had no motive for moving; but, somehow, we have lived to see 
