24G 
all considered the subject of crystallisation, that although there may be 
great difficulty in explaining the exact nature of the process, yet, neverthe- 
less, it is well known that when a certain material is dissolved in fluid 
under certain circumstances, and the solution becomes concentrated, crystals 
are formed. Every tyro in chemistry has, probably, performed the experi- 
ment with common salt; and every such tyro, after having crystallised 
common salt, has re-dissolved it, and re-crystallised it again and again ; and, 
if he were to go on'crystallising and dissolving to the end of time, he would 
only produce crystals of the same form and the same chemical composition. 
Now, let him try to do this with regard to a living organism. The living 
organism is there. We know that every particle of living matter has come 
from a pre-existing living particle ; but let us endeavour to take ourselves 
back to the time when there existed only the non-living, the inorganic 
matter out of which the living had to be formed according to a method 
as is affirmed somewhat resembling that of crystallisation. The chemical 
compounds that form the living matter — ox}^gen, hydrogen, nitrogen, and 
carbon — are supposed to come together in obedience to certain attractions 
and affinities which these primitive particles possess, but of which we know 
very little ; but let us suppose a living thing is formed. Let us imagine 
the particles brought together in the manner supposed, and that a particle 
of living matter makes its appearance. We examine this particle, and try 
to ascertain its nature, and for this purpose we try, as we have tried 
in the case of the crystal, to dissolve it. What is the result ? We destroy 
it ; we do not dissolve it. (Hear, hear.) It ceases to be living matter 
before solution begins. It is no longer what it was before, and we cannot 
make it so. It has gone ; it has ceased to be what it was, and we are not 
dealing with a living particle, but simply with the material that has resulted 
from the death of that which was before alive. W e cannot re-form it. Once 
dead, it is incapable of being re-produced. Therefore, it seems to me a most 
extraordinary thing that some of the greatest authorities in science should 
pretend to compare the formation of living matter with the formation of 
crystals. There is not the slightest analogy, nor the faintest possible parallel, 
no comparison between living things and crystals. There is all the differ- 
ence in the world between the process of crystallisation and the formation 
of living particles, which are supposed by Haeckel, and others who adopt 
his views, to be alike. Whatever may be the marvellous changes that 
occurred in the first formation of living matter, they cannot resemble in the 
slightest degree any phenomena with which we are familiar. There are 
no properties of matter that have as yet been discovered that can give us 
the faintest conception of the nature of the changes which must have taken 
place when the first living thing was formed. With regard to the question of 
complexity and simplicity, of which a good deal has been said, I will just offer 
a few remarks, and will then sit down. It seems to me to have been assumed 
in a most extraordinary way that some forms of living matter are extremely 
simple and that others are extremely complex. I should like to ask what is 
the meaning attached to these terms “ simplicity ” and “ complexity,” when 
