human theory under a far altered state of circumstances If the conditions 
were so altered, you never would arrive at a clear theory y ma ema ics , 
is only because the problem was one adapted to the state of your intelli- 
gence that you have been able to arrive at anything like accuracy in it. In 
matters of geology we are in a far worse position than in either astronomy or 
optics, and we know how far astray men have gone in both those -science* I 
thoroughly agree with Mr. Reddie in the blot he has found as to this unhappy 
catalogue of strata made by Professor Haughton, and quoted by Mr Pattison 
in his 37th paragraph. How does he know that the Eozoio stratum i. 
26,000 feet thick, and the lower Silurian 25,000 feet 1 In order that we 
mioht arrive at a sound conclusion about that, it would require ns to know t.ie 
crust of the earth for a depth of at least fifteen miles. What do we know of 
the crust of the earth at that depth ? Have we scratched into that crust for 
anything like such a depth ? Have we gone a mile and a half, or even amne 
deep? We have had very learned inferences as to the pressure of t 
atmosphere and various other conditions which would take place at a heig 
of five miles in the air ; but when that height really was attained m balloon , 
it was found that all the theories which had been worked out as to tempera- 
ture and other matters were entirely blown to the winds. 
Mr. REUI.IE.-The thickness of the strata given by Professor Haughton is 
110,000 feet, which would really make it twenty-one miles. 
The Chairman.— Well, then we have twenty-one miles of theory and about 
half a mile of practice. (Laughter.) It would be all very well provided these 
theorists gave us such a hypothesis as would leave no »th« way to 
account for their facts. At present, we have already had sufficient expeu- 
ence, from the manner in which theories have faded, to wait until a -ew mo 
facts have been accumulated, and then we may complete our theoiy. 1 
very much indebted to Mr. Bradlaugh for some remarks he made which show 
us how we reason with matters fully, perhaps, in our own mind, and yet fell 
to make one who views the question from a different stand-point appme^ e 
or understand our position. Any one would be able to follow the d.fficul y 
of this kind which he pointed out in relation to Mr. 
relation to Mr. Reddie’s distinction between dead and living matter. N 
"e that there is such a thing as action and such a t^* 
in dead matter as well as in living matter ; and I think d 
lauoh pointed out a very important thing m this question, though I do 
not” know whether he would arrive at my conclusion I suppose not It t 
from the action that I see going on in dead matter that I am as 
vinced of a beginning, and an originator, and creator, as I am in the de, g 
which is displayed in the motion of what we call living matter. 
Mr. Reddie— That was precisely my argument. , 
The Chairman.-I believe that there is an enormous distortion be ween 
dead matter and living matter-that there is a hiatus, a chasm between t 
one and the other which no science has ever been able to bridge over. ‘ 
yet I would grant to Mr. Eradlangh, that I do not see how, from the 
