208 
Rev. A. De La Mare.— Mr. Vice-President, I feel myself particularly 
privileged in being permitted to propose the Resolution that has been 
entrusted to me, namely, a vote of thanks to the author of the . Address 
just delivered, together with a request that he will have it printed for 
circulation. (Hear, hear.) I consider that Mr. Reddie’s address this evening 
is a most apt and becoming conclusion to our first year’s proceedings ; and 
that the resume, he has given us of the papers which have been read before 
the Institute is most valuable in itself, and will be most gratefully received 
by those who have not had the opportunity of following our work so exactly 
in detail as he has kindly brought it before us this night. I may perhaps be 
permitted to express my own regret that illness has prevented me from 
enjoying a constant attendance here, but this has made me appreciate Mr. 
Reddie’s address this evening all the more, because it has not only brought 
before me certain points, which I shall rejoice still more to re-consider when 
the papers are published, but he has suggested many things which perhaps, 
in casual reading, and when one has a large amount of work to perform, 
might escape one. I shall now, however, pass from the Address itself to 
consider the work of the Institute as it has been now brought before us : 
and I cannot help feeling that the most ardent expectations of any of us who 
were first in the field in joining this Institute have been fully borne out by 
the fruit which has been produced during the past year. (Hear, hear.) It 
does seem to me, not only that most important subjects have been most 
earnestly and most admirably treated, but that the result has been in one 
direction from beginning to end. The subjects have been treated as a Chris- 
tian Institute ought to treat them ; and whilst I fully subscribe to Mr. 
Reddie’s remark, that we are bound to receive and consider any paper written 
in a right, candid, and philosophical spirit, yet as an Institute of men who 
profess to be Christians, I think that all such papers ought to be discussed 
in a Christian spirit ; for this is not only an Institution differing from all 
other philosophical institutions on this very ground, but I think that upon 
this very ground it must commend itself to the judgment of all. With regard 
to the various subjects which have been under consideration, I think we seem 
to have touched upon all those points, or at any rate upon the most salient 
points, of the alleged difference between scientific results and the results of 
that queen of all sciences, theology. Certainly every individual, in viewing 
our work, may be considered to view it from his own stand-point, and I look 
at it in its connection with our theological studies. I should be sorry to 
advocate that theology should be in the slightest degree propped up or 
depend for its defence upon science ; but at the same time I should just as 
much regret that theology should as it -were give the cold shoulder to science, 
and seem to thrust it aside as unworthy of consideration ; and just in the 
same way as I think we ought not, in the sphere of our Institute, to allow 
science to be thrust upon us simply because of the names it may bear and tne 
quarter from whence it proceeds. (Hear, hear.) Let us act fairly with the 
one and with the other. We do not seek to advocate theology or to ward off 
facts, by appending a long catalogue of either the philosophical or intellectual 
