1 See Joseph Priestley, p. 94, infra.

2 The advocacy of the introduction of physical science into general education by George Combe and others commenced a good deal earlier; but the movement had acquired hardly any practical force before the time to which I refer.

3 Essays in Criticism, p. 37.

4 “Quamvis enim melius sit bene facere quam nosse, prius tamen est nosse quam facere.”—“Karoli Magni Regis Constitutio de Scholis per singula Episcopia et Monasteria instituendis,” addressed to the Abbot of Fulda. Baluzius, “Capitularia Regum Francorum,” T. i., p. 202.

5 Inaugural Address delivered to the University of St. Andrew February 1, 1867, by J. S. Mill, Rector of the University (pp. 32, 33).

6 “Suggestions for Academical Organisation, with Especial Reference to Oxford.” By the Rector of Lincoln.

7 Goethe, Zahme Xenien, Vierte Abtheilung. I should be glad to take credit for the close and vigorous English version; but it is my wife’s, and not mine.

8 See the “Programme” for 1878, issued by the Society of Arts, p. 14.

9 It is perhaps advisable to remark that the important question of the professional education of managers of industrial works is not touched in the foregoing remarks.

10 “Quasi cursores, vitaÏ lampada tradunt.”—Lucr. De Rerum Nat. ii. 78.

11 “Life and Correspondence of Dr. Priestley,” by J. T. Rutt. Vol. i. p. 50.

12 “Autobiography,” §§ 100, 101.

13 See “The Life of Mary Anne Schimmelpenninck.” Mrs. Schimmelpenninck (nÉe Galton) remembered Priestley very well, and her description of him is worth quotation:—“A man of admirable simplicity, gentleness and kindness of heart, united with great acuteness of intellect. I can never forget the impression produced on me by the serene expression of his countenance. He, indeed, seemed present with God by recollection, and with man by cheerfulness. I remember that, in the assembly of these distinguished men, amongst whom Mr. Boulton, by his noble manner, his fine countenance (which much resembled that of Louis XIV.), and princely munificence, stood pre-eminently as the great MecÆnas; even as a child, I used to feel, when Dr. Priestley entered after him, that the glory of the one was terrestrial, that of the other celestial; and utterly far as I am removed from a belief in the sufficiency of Dr. Priestley’s theological creed, I cannot but here record this evidence of the eternal power of any portion of the truth held in its vitality.”

14 Even Mrs. Priestley, who might be forgiven for regarding the destroyers of her household gods with some asperity, contents herself, in writing to Mrs. Barbauld, with the sarcasm that the Birmingham people “will scarcely find so many respectable characters, a second time, to make a bonfire of.”

15 “Experiments and Observations on Different Kinds of Air,” vol. ii. p. 31.

16 Ibid. pp. 34, 35.

17 “Experiments and Observations on Different Kinds of Air,” vol. ii. p. 40.

18 Ibid. p. 48.

19 Ibid. p. 55.

20 “Experiments and Observations on Different Kinds of Air,” vol. ii. p. 60. The italics are Priestley’s own.

21 “In all the newspapers and most of the periodical publications I was represented as an unbeliever in Revelation, and no better than an atheist.”—“Autobiography,” Rutt. vol. i. p. 124. “On the walls of houses, etc., and especially where I usually went, were to be seen, in large characters, ‘Madan for ever; Damn Priestley; no Presbyterianism; Damn the Presbyterians,’ etc. etc.; and, at one time, I was followed by a number of boys, who left their play, repeating what they had seen on the walls, and shouting out, ‘Damn Priestley; damn him, damn him, for ever, for ever,’ etc. etc. This was no doubt a lesson which they had been taught by their parents, and what they, I fear, had learned from their superiors.”—“Appeal to the Public on the Subject of the Riots at Birmingham.”

22 First Series. “On Some of the Peculiarities of the Christian Religion.” Essay I. Revelation of a Future State.

23 Not only is Priestley at one with Bishop Courtenay in this matter, but with Hartley and Bonnet, both of them stout champions of Christianity. Moreover, Archbishop Whately’s essay is little better than an expansion of the first paragraph of Hume’s famous essay on the Immortality of the Soul:—“By the mere light of reason it seems difficult to prove the immortality of the soul; the arguments for it are commonly derived either from metaphysical topics, or moral, or physical. But it is in reality the Gospel, and the Gospel alone, that has brought life and immortality to light.” It is impossible to imagine that a man of Whately’s tastes and acquirements had not read Hume or Hartley, though he refers to neither.

24 “Essay on the First Principles of Government.” Second edition, 1771, p. 13.

25 “Utility of Establishments,” in “Essay on First Principles of Government,” p. 198, 1771.

26 In 1732 Doddridge was cited for teaching without the Bishop’s leave, at Northampton.

27 The recent proceedings of the House of Commons throw a doubt, which it is to be hoped may speedily be removed, on the accuracy of this statement. (September 1881.)

28 “Discours sur les rÉvolutions de la surface du globe,” Recherches sur les ossemens fossiles, Ed. iv. t. i. p. 185.

29 “On the Eclipses of Agathocles, Thales, and Xerxes,” Philosophical Transactions, vol. cxliii.

30 There is every reason to believe that living plants, like living animals, always respire, and, in respiring, absorb oxygen and give off carbonic acid; but, that in green plants exposed to daylight or to the electric light, the quantity of oxygen evolved in consequence of the decomposition of carbonic acid by a special apparatus which green plants possess exceeds that absorbed in the concurrent respiratory process.

31 Darwin, “Insectivorous Plants,” p. 289.

32 I purposely assume that the air with which the bean is supplied in the case stated contains no ammoniacal salts.

33 The recent researches of Pringsheim have raised a host of questions as to the exact share taken by chlorophyll in the chemical operations which are effected by the green parts of plants. It may be that the chlorophyll is only a constant concomitant of the actual deoxidising apparatus.

34 “Researches in the Life-history of a Cercomonad: a Lesson in Biogenesis;” and “Further Researches in the Life-history of the Monads.”—“Monthly Microscopical Journal,” 1873.

35 Excellently described by Stein, almost all of whose statements I have verified.

36 “Histoire des Sciences Naturelles,” i. p. 152.

37 The text I have followed is that given by Aubert and Wimmer, “Aristoteles Thierkunde; kritisch berichtigter Text mit deutschen Uebersetzung;” but I have tried here and there to bring the English version rather closer to the original than the German translation, excellent as it is, seems to me to be.

38 In modern works on Veterinary Anatomy the lungs are sometimes described as two lobes of a single organ.

39 “Histoire des Sciences Naturelles.”—t. i. p. 130.

40 “Aristotle, a Chapter from the History of Science.”

41 I quote, here and always, Cousin’s edition of the works of Descartes, as most convenient for reference. It is entitled “Œuvres complÈtes de Descartes,” publiÉes par Victor Cousin. 1824.

42 “Les Passions de l’Âme,” Article xxxiii.

43 “Recherches physiologiques sur la Vie et la Mort.” Par Xav. Bichat. Art. SixiÈme.

44 Locke (Human Understanding, Book II., chap. viii. 37) uses Descartes’ illustration for the same purpose, and warns us that “most of the ideas of sensation are no more the likeness of something existing without us than the names that stand for them are the likeness of our ideas, which yet, upon hearing, they are apt to excite in us,” a declaration which paved the way for Berkeley.

45 “Passions de l’Âme,” Art. xxxvi.

46 “Quamcumque Bruti actionem, velut automati mechanici motum artificialem, in eo consistere quod se primÒ sensibile aliquod spiritus animales afficiens, eosque introrsum convertens, sensionem excitat, À qua mox iidem spiritus, velut undulatione reflex denuo retrorsum commoti atque pro concinno ipsius fabricÆ organorum, et partium ordine, in certos nervos musculosque determinati, respectivos membrorum motus perficiunt.”—Willis: “De Anim Brutorum,” p. 5, ed. 1763.

47 “Les Passions de l’Âme,” xlii.

48 Haller, “PrimÆ LineÆ,” ed. iii. “Sensus Interni,” dlviii.

49 “RÉponse de M. Descartes À M. Morus.” 1649. “Œuvres,” tome x. p. 204. “Mais le plus grand de tous les prÉjugÉs que nous ayons retenus de notre enfance, est celui de croire que les bÊtes pensent,” etc.

50 Malebranche states the view taken by orthodox Cartesians in 1689 very forcibly: “Ainsi dans les chiens, les chats, et les autres animaux, il n’y a ny intelligence, ny Âme spirituelle comme on l’entend ordinairement. Ils mangent sans plaisir; ils crient sans douleur; ils croissent sans le sÇavoir; ils ne dÉsirent rien; ils ne connoissent rien; et s’ils agissent avec adresse et d’une maniÈre qui marque l’intelligence, c’est que Dieu les faisant pour les conserver, il a conformÉ leurs corps de telle maniÈre, qu’ils Évitent organiquement, sans le sÇavoir, tout ce qui peut les dÉtruire et qu’ils semblent craindre.” (“Feuillet de Conches. MÉditations MÉtaphysiques et Correspondance de N. Malebranche. NeuviÈme MÉditation.” 1841.)

51 See the remarkable essay of GÖltz, “BeitrÄge zur Lehre von den Functionen der Nervencentren des Frosches,” published in 1869. I have repeated GÖltz’s experiments, and obtained the same results.

52 “De l’Automatisme de la MÉmoire et du Souvenir, dans le Somnambulisme pathologique.” Par le Dr. E. Mesnet, MÉdecin de l’HÔpital Saint-Antoine. “L’Union MÉdicale,” Juillet 21 et 23, 1874. My attention was first called to a summary of this remarkable case, which appeared in the “Journal des DÉbats” for the 7th of August 1874, by my friend General Strachey, F.R.S.

53 Those who have had occasion to become acquainted with the phenomena of somnambulism and of mesmerism, will be struck with the close parallel which they present to the proceedings of F. in his abnormal state. But the great value of Dr. Mesnet’s observations lies in the fact that the abnormal condition is traceable to a definite injury to the brain, and that the circumstances are such as to keep us clear of the cloud of voluntary and involuntary fictions in which the truth is too often smothered in such cases. In the unfortunate subjects of such abnormal conditions of the brain, the disturbance of the sensory and intellectual faculties is not unfrequently accompanied by a perturbation of the moral nature, which may manifest itself in a most astonishing love of lying for its own sake. And, in this respect, also, F.’s case is singularly instructive, for though, in his normal state, he is a perfectly honest man, in his abnormal condition he is an inveterate thief, stealing and hiding away whatever he can lay hands on, with much dexterity, and with an absurd indifference as to whether the property is his own or not. Hoffman’s terrible conception of the “Doppelt-gÄnger” is realised by men in this state—who live two lives, in the one of which they may be guilty of the most criminal acts, while, in the other, they are eminently virtuous and respectable. Neither life knows anything of the other. Dr. Mesnet states that he has watched a man in his abnormal state elaborately prepare to hang himself, and has let him go on until asphyxia set in, when he cut him down. But on passing into the normal state the would-be suicide was wholly ignorant of what had happened. The problem of responsibility is here as complicated as that of the prince-bishop, who swore as a prince and not as a bishop. “But, highness, if the prince is damned, what will become of the bishop?” said the peasant.

54 “Lay Sermons, Essays and Reviews,” p. 355.

55 “Essai de Psychologie,” chap. xxvii.

56 In justice to Reid, however, it should be stated that the chapters on sensation in the “Essays on the Intellectual Powers” (1785) exhibit a great improvement. He is, in fact, in advance of his commentator, as the note to Essay II. chap. ii. p. 248 of Hamilton’s edition shows.

57 Haller, amplifying Descartes, writes in the “PrimÆ LineÆ,” CCCLXVI.—“Non est adeo obscurum sensum omnem oriri ab objecti sensibilis impressione in nervum quemcumque corporis humani, et eamdem per eum nervum ad cerebrum pervenientem tunc demum representari animÆ, quando cerebrum adtigit. Ut etiam hoc falsum sit animam inproximo per sensoria nervorumque ramos sentire.”... DLVII.—“Dum ergo sentimus quinque diversissima entia conjunguntur: corpus quod sentimus: organi sensorii adfectio ab eo corpore: cerebri adfectio a sensorii percussione nata: in anima nata mutatio: animÆ denique conscientia et sensationis adperceptio.” Nevertheless, Sir William Hamilton gravely informs his hearers:—“We have no more right to deny that the mind feels at the finger points, as consciousness assures us, than to assert that it thinks exclusively in the brain.”—“Lecture on Metaphysics and Logic,” ii. p. 128. “We have no reason whatever to doubt the report of consciousness, that we actually perceive at the external point of sensation, and that we perceive the material reality.”—Ibid. p. 129.

58 “Observations on Man,” vol. i. p. 11.

59 Ibid. p. 8. The speculations of Bonnet are remarkably similar to those of Hartley; and they appear to have originated independently, though the “Essai de Psychologie” (1754) is of five years’ later date than the “Observations on Man” (1749).

60 “An Inquiry into the Human Mind on the Principles of Common Sense,” chap. ii. § 2. Reid affirms that “it is genius, and not the want of it, that adulterates philosophy, and fills it with error and false theory;” and no doubt his own lucubrations are free from the smallest taint of the impurity to which he objects. But, for want of something more than that sort of “common sense,” which is very common and a little dull, the contemner of genius did not notice that the admission here made knocks so big a hole in the bottom of “common sense philosophy,” that nothing can save it from foundering in the dreaded abyss of Idealism.

61 The following diagrammatic scheme may help to elucidate the theory of sensation:—

Immediate knowledge is confined to states of consciousness, or, in other words, to the phenomena of mind. Knowledge of the physical world, or of one’s own body and of objects external to it, is a system of beliefs or judgments based on the sensations. The term “self” is applied not only to the series of mental phenomena which constitute the ego, but to the fragment of the physical world which is their constant concomitant. The corporeal self, therefore, is part of the non-ego; and is objective in relation to the ego as subject.

62 “Chaque fibre est une espÈce de touche ou de marteau destinÉ À rendre un certain ton.”—Bonnet, “Essai de Psychologie,” chap. iv.

63 The “Exercitationes de Generatione Animalium,” which Dr. George Ent extracted from him and published in 1651.

64 “De Generatione Animalium,” lib ii. cap. x.

65 “De Generatione,” lib. ii. cap. iv.

66 “Cependant, pour revenir aux formes ordinaires ou aux Âmes matÉrielles, cette durÉe qu’il leur faut attribuer À la place de celle qu’on avoit attributÉe aux atomes pourroit faire douter si elles ne vont pas de corps en corps; ce qui seroit la mÉtempsychose, À peu prÈs comme quelques philosophes ont cru la transmission du mouvement et celle des espÈces. Mais cette imagination est bien ÉloignÉe de la nature des choses. Il n’y a point de tel passage; et c’est ici oÙ les transformations de Messieurs Swammerdam, Malpighi, et Leewenhoek, qui sont des plus excellens observateurs de notre tems, sont venues À mon secours, et m’ont fait admettre plus aisÉment, que l’animal, et toute autre substance organisÉe ne commence point lorsque nous le croyons, et que sa generation apparente n’est qu’une dÉveloppement et une espÈce d’augmentation. Aussi ai je remarquÉ que l’auteur de la “Recherche de la VeritÉ,” M. Regis, M. Hartsocker, et d’autres habiles hommes n’ont pas ÉtÉ fort ÉloignÉs de ce sentiment.” Leibnitz, “SystÈme nouveau de la Nature,” 1695. The doctrine of “EmboÎtement” is contained in the “ConsidÉrations sur le principe de vie,” 1705; the preface to the “TheodicÉe,” 1710; and the “Principes de la Nature et de la Grace” (§ 6), 1718.

67 “Il est vrai que la pensÉe la plus raisonnable et la plus conforme À l’experience sur cette question trÈs difficile de la formation du foetus; c’est que les enfans sont dÉja presque tout formÉs avant mÊme l’action par laquelle ils sont conÇus; et que leurs mÈres ne font que leur donner l’accroissement ordinaire dans le temps de la grossesse.” “De la Recherche de la VeritÉ,” livre ii. chap. vii. p. 334, 7th ed., 1721.

68 The writer is indebted to Dr. Allen Thomson for reference to the evidence contained in a note to Haller’s edition of Boerhaave’s “PrÆlectiones AcademicÆ,” vol. v. pt ii. p. 497, published in 1744, that Haller originally advocated epigenesis.

69 “ConsidÉrations sur les Corps organisÉs,” chap. x.

70 Bonnet had the courage of his opinions, and in the “PalingÉnÉsie Philosophique,” part vi. chap, iv., he develops a hypothesis which he terms “Évolution naturelle;” and which, making allowance for his peculiar views of the nature of generation, bears no small resemblance to what is understood by “evolution” at the present day:—

“Si la volontÉ divine a crÉÉ par un seul Acte l’UniversalitÉ des Êtres, d’oÙ venoient ces plantes et ces animaux dont Moyse nous decrit la Production au troisieme et au cinquieme jour du renouvellement de notre monde?

“Abuserois-je de la libertÉ de conjectures si je disois, que les Plantes et les Animaux qui existent aujourd’hui sont parvenus par une sorte d’evolution naturelle des Etres organisÉs qui peuplaient ce premier Monde, sorti immÉdiatement des Mains du Createur?...

“Ne supposons que trois rÉvolutions. La Terre vient de sortir des Mains du Createur. Des causes preparÉes par sa Sagesse font dÉvelopper de toutes parts les Germes. Les Etres organisÉs commencent À jouir de l’existence. Ils Étoient probablement alors bien diffÉrens de ce qu’ils sont aujourd’hui. Ils l’etoient autant que ce premier Monde diffÉroit de celui que nous habitons. Nous manquons de moyens pour juger de ces dissemblances, et peut-Être que le plus habile Naturaliste qui auroit ÉtÉ placÉ dans ce premier Monde y auroit entiÈrement mÉconnu nos Plantes et nos Animaux.”

71 “Ce mot (germe) ne dÉsignera pas seulement un corps organisÉ rÉduit en petit; il dÉsignera encore toute espÈce de prÉformation originelle dont un Tout organique pent rÉsulter comme de son principe immÉdiat.”—“PalingÉnÉsie Philosophique,” part x. chap. ii.

72 “M. Cuvier considÉrant que tous les Êtres organisÉs sont dÉrivÉs de parens, et ne voyant dans la nature aucune force capable de produire l’organisation, croyait À la prÉ-existence des germes; non pas À la prÉ-existence d’un Être tout formÉ, puisqu’il est bien Évident que ce n’est que par des dÉveloppemens successifs que l’Être acquiert sa forme; mais, si l’on peut s’exprimer ainsi, À la prÉ-existence du radical de l’Être, radical qui existe avant que la sÉrie des Évolutions ne commence, et qui remonte certainement, suivant la belle observation de Bonnet, À plusieurs generations.”—Laurillard, “Éloge de Cuvier,” note 12.

73 “Histoire Naturelle,” tom. ii. ed. ii. 1750, p. 350.

74 Ibid. p. 351.

75 See particularly Buffon, l.c. p. 41.

76 “Exercitationes de Generatione.” Ex. 62, “Ovum esse primordium commune omnibus animalibus.”

77 In some cases of sexless multiplication the germ is a cell-aggregate—if we call germ only that which is already detached from the parent organism.

78 Harvey, “Exercitationes de Generatione.” Ex. 45, “QuÆnam sit pulli materia et quomodo fiat in Ovo.”

79 Not yet actually demonstrated in the case of phÆnogamous plants.

80 As Buffon has well said:—“L’idÉe de ramener l’explication de tous les phÉnomÈnes À des principes mecaniques est assurement grande et belle, ce pas est le plus hardi qu’on peut faire en philosophie, et c’est Descartes qui l’a fait.”—l.c. p. 50.

81 “Principes de la Philosophie,” TroisiÈme partie, § 45.

82 “Ethices,” Pars tertia, PrÆfatio.

83 “SystÈme de la Nature.” “Essai sur la Formation des Corps OrganisÉs,” 1751, xiv.

84 “ConsidÉrations Philosophiques sur la gradation naturelle des formes de l’Être; ou les essais de la nature qui apprend À faire l’homme,” 1768.

85 “Recherches sur les causes des principaux faits physiques,” par J. B. Lamarck. Paris. Seconde annÉe de la RÉpublique. In the preface, Lamarck says that the work was written in 1776, and presented to the Academy in 1780; but it was not published before 1794, and, at that time, it presumably expressed Lamarck’s mature views. It would be interesting to know what brought about the change of opinion manifested in the “Recherches sur l’organisation des corps vivants,” published only seven years later.

86 See the “Historical Sketch” prefixed to the last edition of the “Origin of Species.”

87 “First Principles” and “Principles of Biology,” 1860-1864.

88 “Generelle Morphologie,” 1866.

89 “Il s’agit donc de prouver que la sÉrie qui constitute l’Échelle animale rÉside essentiellement dans la distribution des masses principales qui la composent et non dans celle des espÈces ni mÊme toujours dans celle des genres.”—“Phil. Zoologique,” chap. v.

90 Philosophie Zoologique, premiÈre partie, chap. iii.

91 “Entwurf einer Darstellung der zwischen dem Embryozustande der hÖheren Thiere und dem permanenten der niederen stattfindenden Parallele,” “BeytrÄge zur Vergleichenden Anatomie,” Bd. ii. 1811.

92 “Origin of Species,” ed. 1, p. 457.

93 Ibid. p. 458.

94 “Origin of the Species,” p. 431.