247 
applied to living matter ? Let us take the monera, said to be among the 
simplest forms of living matter with which we are acquainted. All we can 
see is clear, colourless, transparent, structureless, semifluid matter. Where 
is the evidence that the composition of this is more simple than that of the 
most complex living matter in existence ? Take, for example, the highest 
form of living matter we know — the living matter which forms part of the 
brain cells of man himself, for I suppose we cannot conceive anything much 
higher. If we were to assume gradations of complexity and different degrees of 
superiority, we might go as far as to suggest that at any rate the highest and 
most complex living matter is to be found in the grey matter constituting the 
outer part of the human brain. But what is the fact 1 The matter we find 
there is no more complex than the living matter of the simplest monad, as far, 
at least, as we know. If we take this brain matter and examine it, we find 
that we can resolve it into certain organic substances, closely allied to the 
albuminous material which Professor Huxley and others call protoplasm, 
although they are not able to define precisely what they mean by the term. 
(Hear, hear.) They are unable to tell us in what way protoplasm differs 
from albumen, and. muscle tissue, and a thousand other things. They 
simply make use of a name almost without a meaning. Well, the highest 
conceivable form of living matter, as far as we know, closely accords in its 
composition with the lowest form of living matter ; and, as far as regard.s 
structure, if we examine that which comes from the highest organism, 
and that which is concerned in the formation of the lowest, no difference 
whatever can be distinguished. It is not that one is more complicated, or 
exhibits a structure different from the other. There is no structure in either. 
Both are perfectly clear, transparent, and structureless, and yet one is con- 
cerned in the performance of certain functions and offices, while the other is 
concerned in the performance of totally different functions and offices. Are 
we, then, to believe that the difference in the functions discharged is due 
merely to the chemical properties of the substances of which the living matter 
is composed ? We cannot do this, because, when we come to analyse the 
two different kinds of living matter, we find in the material which results 
from their death the same elements. And, if the elements are not in pre- 
cisely the same amounts or in the same proportions to one another, the 
difference which may exist in the composition bears no relation and has no 
reference that can be discovered, either to the difference in action or to the 
different structures which may be evolved from the two different forms of 
living matter. Therefore the terms “ simplicity ” and “ complexity ” seem 
to me to be totally inadmissible, and I venture to think that not one 
of those who are in the habit of speaking of simple and complex forms can 
give a rational explanation of what he means by the phrases he employs. 
What is generally meant by the simplest form of living matter is that when 
it attains its highest form of development it is still a simple thing, and what 
seems to be understood by that of the greatest complexity is, that when 
it attains its highest degree of development certain marvellous structures 
are produced ; but when we come to look at the living matter itself there is 
