254 
THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL AND TRANSACTIONS. [September 2i, 1870. 
sited by blow-flies. Redi’s experiments were extended 
to many other things besides flesh, always with similar 
results, and generalizing on them he arrived at the pre¬ 
sumption that in all cases of the appearance of life in 
previously dead material the real explanation of the fact 
was the introduction of living germs or eggs from with¬ 
out into that dead material. Hence originated the 
hypothesis of Biogenesis, or what is now termed the 
germ theory, which may be stated in the aphorism 
“ omne vivum ex vivo.” But even in Redi’s time there 
were difficulties in the way of reconciling known facts 
with that hypothesis, and he candidly admitted them. 
However, the subsequent progress of microscopic re¬ 
search revealed such a prodigality of provision for multi¬ 
plication in the lowest and minutest forms of life by 
germs of some kind that the old belief in spontaneous 
generation began to appear not only untrue but absurd, 
and at the middle of last century it was almost univer¬ 
sally discredited. 
But the aid afforded by the microscope soon reached a 
limit, and, in some cases where development of life took 
place, the existence of extremely minute germs had to be 
assumed in order to make observation accord with the 
hypothesis of biogenesis. Thus, for instance, an infusion 
of hay, left for some days, will swarm with living things, 
among which any one reaching the diameter of 35 ^ - t h 
of an inch is a giant. In such cases the microscope was 
no longer competent to reveal the existence of germs. 
At that stage Buffon and Needham took up the question 
whether the development of infusorial animalcules was 
due to germs or not, and they endeavoured to submit this 
t© a crucial test. Assuming that the vitality of all 
germs is destroyed by heat, Needham boiled the infusion 
of hay, corked it up and excluded air ; but nevertheless 
animalcules were developed. Hence he inferred that 
living germs were not essential for the development of 
infusoria; still he did not altogether adopt the‘alterna¬ 
tive hypothesis of spontaneous generation, but took re¬ 
fuge in a kind of compromise. Spallanzani followed, by 
showing that if air was absolutely excluded in Need¬ 
ham’s experiment no infusoria were developed. Schulze 
and Schwann’s experiments with air that had been heated 
to redness gave the same results, but all they proved was 
that this treatment of air destroyed something essential 
for the development of life. That something might be 
gaseous, liquid or solid; but it still remained only an 
hypothesis that it consisted of germs. 
Pasteur was the first to show that by straining air 
through cotton-wool clearly recognizable germs were re¬ 
tained, that these germs were competent to give rise to 
living forms in a solution fit for their development, and 
that the incapacity of air strained through cotton-wool 
to give rise to life was not due to any occult influence on 
the constituents of the air. The evidence he obtained 
as to the existence of myriads of living particles in the 
air was both directly and indirectly of great weight in 
favour of Biogenesis. On the other hand, the fact that 
hermetically-sealed liquids, after being exposed to heat 
for a long time, have sometimes exhibited slow forms of 
life, are the only evidence in favour of spontaneous genera¬ 
tion. In regard to these instances, they are not invariable 
in their results, nor do they indicate with certainty spon¬ 
taneous generation, inasmuch as the resistance of living 
material to heat varies within considerable limits. 
This slender statement of the history of this question 
given by Professor Huxley in his address, will serve to 
show that his review was comprehensive and impartial; 
and the opinions he offered himself are no less so. In 
the present state of science, the alternative is offered to 
us of adopting the opinion that germs can stand a 
greater heat than has been supposed, or of assuming the 
molecules of dead material to be capable of arranging 
themselves into living bodies exactly such as can be 
shown to originate in another way; and it is a strong ar¬ 
gument against the doctrine of spontaneous generation 
to find Professor Huxley declaring that under these cir¬ 
cumstances he does not think the choice can be doubtful 
for a moment. But at the same time he adds, that though 
he cannot too strongly express that conviction, he guards 
himself against the supposition of suggesting the impossi¬ 
bility of spontaneous generation. That he considers would 
be presumption. How far it may be possible to bring 
together the conditions under which matter assumes 
the properties we call vital, is a question we cannot yet 
decide on scientific grounds. Looking back through the 
prodigious vista of the past, we find no record of the 
commencement of life that would indicate the conditions 
of its origin. To say, in the absence of evidence, that 
we have any belief as to the mode in which existing 
forms of life originated would be, from a scientific point 
of view, to use words in a wrong sense. But, in such a 
case, expectation is permissible where belief is not, and 
if it were possible to look back beyond the abyss of geo¬ 
logically recorded time to that remote period when the 
material of the present earth was passing through phy¬ 
sical and chemical conditions which it can no more see 
again than a man can recall his infancy, the man of 
science might expect to see the solution of living proto¬ 
plasm from material not living. That is the expectation 
to which Professor Huxley is led by analogical reasoning, 
though he begged his audience to recollect that he had 
no right to call his opinion anything but an act of philo- 
sophical faith. 
It would be impossible here to follow the President 
further in his address, than by stating that he dealt with 
the subject in its relation to epidemic disease, and, in a 
manner that was deeply interesting, reminded his audi¬ 
ence that in regard to this point, the study of a problem, 
curious to investigators but apparently of no conceivable 
utility to mankind, had led to the discovery of fields 
laden with a harvest of golden grain immediately con¬ 
vertible into those things which even the most sordidly 
practical men admit to be of value,—namely, money and 
life. The cases he referred to as illustrating this truth, 
were the silkworm disease, known in France as ‘ Pebrine,’ 
and the mortality from scarlet fever. He urged these 
instances as an admonition that ‘'the people perish for 
lack of knowledge,” and that the alleviation of misery 
as well as the promotion of man’s welfare, must be sought 
in that diligent, patient, loving study of Nature in all 
its multitudinous aspects, from the results of which we 
arrive at exact knowledge or science. 
On Thursday, the 15th inst., the sections commenced 
their meetings. In section B, which is devoted to Che¬ 
mical Science, the President, Professor H. E. Roscoe, 
delivered the following address: — 
Gentlemen,—In the midst of the excitement of the 
horrible war in which the two most scientific nations of 
the Continent are now plunged, let us endeavour to turn 
our thoughts into channels more congenial to the scien¬ 
tific inquirer; and allow me to recount to you, as far as 
I am able, the peaceful victories which, since our last 
meeting in Exeter, have been achieved in our special 
department of chemistry. But first may I be permitted 
to draw your attention to the fact that whilst, on the 
one hand, we hear of professors of chemistry and their 
students volunteering in the humane offices of field- 
apothecaries or hospital attendants, we learn, on the 
other hand, that a distinguished chemist has accepted 
the chairmanship of a scientific committee called together 
for the express purpose of employing all the resources 
of modern chemistry in the horrible destruction of their 
fellow-creatures; for to what do such resources in the 
last instance amount, but to sudden explosion, fire, or 
poison ? The application of such means in such an age 
as this cannot surely be justified in any sense either by 
patriotism or public duty. And yet, in spite of all this, 
it is, in my mind, mainly to the brotherly intercourse of 
those interested in science and in its applications to the 
arts and manufactures in different countries that we 
must look as the small but living fire, which, in the end, 
