862

with regard to the physiological action of the alkaloidsof opium has probably been due to various experimentershaving worked either with impure alkaloids or with sub-stances which although bearing the same name were inreality perfectly different. All this is avoided in Germanyby the conjoined action of the chemical and experimentaldepartments in a pharmacological laboratory, but in thiscountry there existed until recently hardly any means bywhich a pharmacological experimenter could be sure thathe was really dealing with a pure substance or even

with the substance at all which he supposed himself tobe employing. Some years ago, when wishing to demonstrateupon myself the action of nitrite of amyl, I was amazed tofind that I inhaled from the bottle which was labeled" nitrite of amyl " for several minutes without experiencingthe least physiological effect, the reason being that althoughthe drug had been bought as a specimen of nitrite of amyl itdid not contain a single particle of the nitrite. Now, thanks tothe liberality of the Pharmaceutical Society, guided by thewisdom of the President and Council, a research laboratoryhas been established which has already done most excellentwork and gives promise of still more in the future. Thatcomplicated subject, the alkaloids of aconite, is being un-ravelled, and Professor Dunstan has prepared pure specimensof the different nitrites which have been tested physio-logically by Professor Cash. One great disadvantage underwhich pharmacological workers in this country previously layas compared with those in Germany is being removed by theformation of a research laboratory by the PharmaceuticalSociety, and in it men will no doubt be trained who will notonly greatly benefit pharmacy, but may supply the wantwhich may ere long be felt of ascertaining the susceptibilityof a patient to the action of a drug before its administration.This may, no doubt, be done to a considerable extent bymedical men themselves, but medical men are often too busyto give the requisite time. Many of them do not possess andcannot during the intervals of a busy practice acquire therequisite chemical knowledge, and even when they have theknowledge and the time they may not always have the

apparatus or the reagents at hand, and it will thus, in manyinstances at least, be easier to engage the services of athoroughly trained pharmaceutical chemist who has all theappliances at hand and who is daily engaged in chemical opera-tions. But all this will increase the necessity for extendedknowledge, and whilst extended knowledge will raise thestatus of the pharmaceutical chemist it will demand a moreprolonged curriculum as well as a steady study of the subjectslong after he has passed all his examinations. Such studywill be necessary in order to keep you up to the highest stan-dard of your daily work, but I trust that you will not be con-tented with this. Set before you as an example Serturner,the apothecary of the little German town of Hamelu. Utilisethe opportunities of learning methods of work given to youduring your curriculum of study ; utilise the time for workyou may have afterwards ; and day by day do your utmostthat this world may not only be the better but the wiser forhaving you in it. "Work while it is day," gentlemen, andconstantly remember that "the night cometh when no mancan work."

Introductory LectureON

PROGRESS AT KING’S COLLEGE AND ONTHE NATURE OF LIFE.

Delivered at the Opening of the Course on Medicine,1893-94,

BY LIONEL BEALE, M.B. LOND., F.R.S.,F.R.C.P. LOND.,

PROFESSOR OF THE PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICE OF MEDICINE IN KING’SCOLLEGE, LONDON, AND PHYSICIAN TO THE HOSPITAL.

The Progress of Modern Education.EVERYWHERE’ we see evidence of the predominating

influence of the spirit of progress. Does not the love of

progress help to keep nations great and make peoples happy,self-reliant, powerful and free ? Ideas of progress in manynew directions have taken possession of the mind of the

present generation. So sensitive is our mental state at this

time that the thought of the least check, the faintest indica-tion of what may be but a temporary falling back, is regardedwith fear lest the dread decree of the new philosophy thatthe weak shall go to the wall and all not fit to surviveshall perish should be about to be carried into execu-

tion. The longing for quick progress in every part ofthe world leads thoughtful people from time to time toinquire whether they and all associated with them in workare really progressing fast enough to hold and improve theposition already attained, to ensure prosperity and to renderanything like falling back in the future most improbable. Inthat smaller sphere occupied by institutions for teaching thesame effort is apparent, and the same struggle to move onwards.and the same fear of falling back prevails ; the intense desireto improve, to do more in the same time and to do it betterthan has been done before, animates all concerned. But

though progress marks, and, we may hope, will continue tomark, institutions and public bodies, there comes a time wheneach individual worker in turn begins to lose energy, even if hedoes not long for tranquillity, for time for thought, for escapefrom the struggle and active work he once loved. All sooneror later grow old, though, strange to say, some ardentscientific men, prophesying the discovery of new potencies,have ventured to assure’ us that even this great law ofnature, that all that lives shall deteriorate and die, will some.day be suspended, or that at least its operation will be

postponed for a time. Be that as it may, I trust that our

college will be amongst the educational institutions whichwill enjoy perpetual youth and repeated rejuvenescence.In these advances in the wonderful increase and diffu-sion of knowledge amongst us medicine and surgery have.largely participated. The new powers we now possess areindeed great compared with those we enjoyed only twentyyears ago, whilst recent progress has rendered it certain thatmore will be gained year by year. Although we have stillmuch to learn, the improvements in diagnosis and treatmentduring the past few years have been most marked, whilst theprevention of disease, almost constituting a new science, willsoon be raised to the position of being a very importantdepartment of the State. But it is in the treatment of

surgical cases that the most striking and immediate benefitto mankind has recently been rendered evident to all by the far-reaching researches of Lister-till quite recently our seniorsurgeon-and their practical value has been demonstrated inevery part of the world. The only difficulty with which we haveto contend as regards the spread of knowledge is the in-creased and increasing heavy expense which is thrown uponschools and colleges ; but, thanks to much private generosityand some public help, this has to some extent been remedied,.and as time goes on it is hoped not only that the difficultywill be removed but that prosperity will reach the teachersand that they will be fairly remunerated for their arduousand incessant work. So also the introduction of more efficientmethods of treatment and the improved prospect of saving-life in many serious cases have greatly added to the expense ofnursing as well as the general management of patients in ourpublic hospitals, but we fervently hope that the wealthy willhelp us out of our difficulties as they have invariably done inthe past, so that we may be enabled to be of the greatestservice possible to the poor who cannot help themselves in.serious illness and injury.

Laboratory and Tutorial Teaching.In no department of modern medical education has progress

been more marked of late years than in the increase ofpractical training, and in King’s College we have made greatimprovements in this direction, especially as regards the earlyyears of studentship in physiology, histology, biology andchemistry, as well as in anatomy. Much greater importanceis attached to this practical part of the work than wasusual in former days, and now every student is taught in thelaboratory and workroom as well as in the lecture theatre, andif so inclined he can learn how original scientific inquiry iscarried out and take part in new researches. Not only so, butthere are many scholarships to encourage him in the prosecu-tion of original research, and well-equipped laboratories andwork-rooms are at his disposal. The advantage of laboratoriesin connexion with medical work was fully recognised more thanforty years ago, when Dr. Marcet, Dr. Thudichum and myselfhad our own private laboratories arranged for working andteaching. It was in this way that I began in a house adjoining-the hospital in 1852, and amongst my pupils of those earlydays in medical chemistry and microscopical investigationwere several examiners and some teachers, as well as manystudents who afterwards held important appointments. This

863

work went on for seven years, and during the later part of thistime my laboratory was carried on in connexion with the- chair of physiology in King’s College, to which I was appointed’in 1853. Besides useful additions to and improvements inmany of the large laboratories, other important laboratoriesfor both teaching and research have been recently estab-lished. The large bacteriological laboratory founded byProfessor Crookshank is in excellent working order, and wehave also in active operation Professor Cheyne’s laboratoryconnected with the chair of surgery, Dr. Ferrier’s laboratoryof neuro-pathology and the botanical work-room under themanagement of Professor Bottomley. In short, our labora-tories and work-rooms for practical study are now a featurein our college,Positioo of King’s College with ’l’efe’l’enee to Religious Teac7ting.The general question whether religion should be taught to

the young has been much contested of late. The new wave of

anti-religious feeling which just now afflicts a great part ofmankind will no doubt subside after a time, like many pre-ceding waves of the kind. We shall then find that many of theassertions by which people’s minds have been influenced restupon assumption only and are actually inconsistent with manyscientific facts. Looking from the practical side, we askwhat should be taught to the young if it be decided that theyshall not be instructed in religion ? Are they to be told that.nothing has been made by God, but that things have beenformed by evolution, that there is no God, no Design, no PowerAbove matter, no Director, no Superintending Providence,but merely that all is due to cosmic process only and that allwas once cosmic dust and that all will become cosmic dust

again? The curious demand that morals shall be taughtr,vithout religion and the progress of secularity in recent

years indicate that the time is supposed to be ripefor a tremendous change. We shall soon be face to facewith the contention that little children should be educated’without any religious teaching in the schools because aso-called liberal party professes to have been convincedthat miracle of every kind has ever been, is, and willcontinue to be impossible, and decrees that in future noone shall be allowed to teach anything that is contrary tothis view. But the possibility of miracle has not been.and cannot at present be disproved from the science side.So long as we remain unable to show precisely how a.particle of matter in the living state differs from thesame matter when it has ceased to live, it is not easy tounderstand how we can declare that in the present stateof scientific knowledge we are justified in concluding thatthe relation between life and infinite power is essentiallyof the same nature as that which subsists between mere

non-living matter and the infinite. As men learn more

concerning the facts of nature they will be less influenced bythe arbitrary dicta of those who profess to know more thanaverage mortals concerning the unseen and the unknown, theintangible, the imponderable, the unknowable, the absolute.Seeing that the enormous majority of intelligent mankindstill believes in religion just as their predecessors havebelieved for centuries, it is very strange that the opponentsof religion do not endeavour to clearly state the facts andarguments which have influenced them. As is well known,through all the changes and improvements which havebeen introduced since its foundation in 1831 the counciland staff of King’s College have firmly adhered to one

principle which actuated its founders. Believing that everysystem of general education for the youth of a Christiancommunity should comprise religious instruction in theChristian religion, " it was determined that the doctrines andduties of Christianity, as inculcated by the Church ofEngland, should be taught in this college. Probably we arethe last, or nearly the last, of the colleges of our Christiancountry that adheres to such teaching as a part of its system.On this account we are considered by some in these days tobe unreasonable and behind the times, and our system hasbeen assailed, but on this account only, as narrow andsectarian. Looking, however, from the side of science, noconvincing arguments can be found for this opinion. Inwhat particulars is it considered that we are narrow, un-reasonable or behind the time-illiberal, prejudiced or opposedto new knowledge, and not deserving of the help given toother educational institutions ? Undoubtedly some of theminds claiming to be most advanced are against us, butwhether such minds are really advanced is another matter.

Religion and Science.It has been assumed that many new facts recently de-

monstrated in connexion with the non-living world apply

equally to life and to all living things, and this assumptionseems to be a most important factor in weakening and de-stroying faith. The contention that the living and non-livingare one has been asserted again and again and is undoubtedlyat this time sometimes believed to be true. The numerous argu-ments and questionable assertions and conclusions based uponthis assumption have been considered in the last edition of mywork on Protoplasm, and these, like the assumption itself,seem to me to be quite unjustifiable. The assumption thatbecause we know more about matter and force we musttherefore know more about life cannot be sustained, whilst, sofar from the new knowledge concerning matter helping usto understand life-phenomena, these latter are removedfurther from the physical category by it and are shown tobe not different in degree but in kind-absolutely different.

It seems to have been forgotten by many that in sciencecompleteness or finality is contrary to experience. Thefinal solution of some great scientific problem seems evernear-so to say, on the eve of being determined, but, alas,it soon is shown to be really far off. In fact, whatever mayhave been said to the contrary, it is certain that completenessand final solution are inconsistent with the never-ceasingchanges which attend progress in almost every department ofscientific inquiry. The greater the achievement the morethere will be to be achieved. All the changes in scientificopinion-and they are many-which have occurred inmodern times have been eclipsed by this purely physicaldoctrine of life which has been evolved and perfectedduring the past thirty years and has exerted a greatinfluence upon our general views concerning the past, presentand future of all things. This last change in view has neverbeen surpassed in the intense eagerness with which of late ithas been advocated and forced into popularity; nor in themomentous consequences which must almost certainly flowfrom its general acceptance will it be exceeded by any eventrecorded in history. If the blessings of Christianity approacheven in moderate degree those generally, and with goodreason, claimed for it by the best and wisest of every genera-tion that succeeded its foundation, what, alas, must be theconsequences to the nations of its abandonment ?But the more our knowledge is advanced the more there is

discovered that requires further investigation. The gulf whichseparates that which is known from that which requires tobe known before we can perfectly understand increases inwidth and depth. As investigation proceeds new paths forfresh investigation are opened out, but nothing final, nothinglike complete knowledge, results ; and, whether we explorethe vastness of space or endeavour to reach the ultimatematerial atoms in a particle of living matter and study theirproperties and their relations, we soon lose ourselves ; thedifficulty remains unsolved and our knowledge incomplete-so that, as it appears to me, nothing has yet been discoveredin science which prevents the Christian from still lookingback upon the past in the hope of finding unchanged andunchanging perfection. Mr. Huxley, however, still vigorouslyasserts that "that ecclesiastical spirit, that clericalism ......is the deadly enemy of science. " He will probably be aloneamongst living scientific men in this contention. To bringa charge of this sort in these days is ridiculous andlike beating the air. Where is the evidence ? " Livelyfriend" would be quite as correct in the sentenceas "deadly enemy." For many years past distinguishedteachers of religious truth have advanced propositions calculated to disturb and weaken faith. Miracle has by somebeen regarded as a bugbear and it has been suggested that itought to be removed. Only recently it has been said thatthe Catholic faith should be put " into its right relation tomodern intellectual problems" ("Lux Mundi," preface tothe tenth edition). The faith is to be "disencumbered,reinterpreted and explained" anew ; in other words, thefaith is to be modified in certain particulars in order to meetthe altered views supposed to be necessitated by scientificprogress. But can the old faith be so modified as to meet theclaims urged from the outside ? Would not modificationfollow modification until little or nothing to modify wouldremain, unless advancing science is only for a time to beattended by advancing faith ?

On the Nature of Life.The implicit belief in the machine-view of living things is

quite extraordinary. The "animal machine," the "livingmachine," the "human machine," are phrases frequentlymet with ; yet the assertion that the formation of everyliving thing "is a purely mechanical problem " is devoidof all foundation. "The machine which we call the

864

human body " is not a machine, for the human body has I

grown and must die, whilst the machine is made, but has c

never lived and cannot die. Assertions of the same kind are s

legion. " The formation of a crystal, a plant or an animal c

is a purely mechanical problem, " and yet the crystal can bedissolved and will form again, whilst the living thing must tbe destroyed before it can be dissolved. It is easy to call a <

living thing "a force-conditioning machine," but impossible ito prove any real likeness between any living thing and any 1machine. It has been said that the "machinery "is mole- vcular; but how can molecules work like machinery and and where is the machine that exhibits the molecular character <

in any part ? 1 After telling the story of "Jack and the Bean-’ <

stalk" in the Romanes Lecture for the present year to the the University of Oxford, Mr. Huxley remarks that the plant (

"builds itself up and then by degrees withers and dis- l

appears from view." This process of going forth and, 1as it were, returning to the starting point, Mr. Huxley i

says, "may be likened to the ascent and descent of a slung istone, or to the course of an arrow along its trajectory."The comparison suggests that the stone slings itself andthat the arrow shoots itself. And this is the physicalconsummation of all things from the first to the last, accord-ing to Mr. Huxley, and we may hope it will be the last ofsuch shadowy vapourings which emanate from cosmic vapour,are nowhere and lead to-nothing. "Natural knowledge,"he says, ’’ tends more and more to the conclusion that all thechoir of heaven and furniture of the earth are the transitoryforms of parcels of cosmic substance wending along the road ofevolution from nebulous potentiality... back to the indefinablelatency from which they arose. " 2 I do not believe that in allscience any justification for such conjectures can be obtained.Neither is there any evidence whatever that "natural know-ledge " tends as asserted, or ever did tend, or ever will tend,to the conclusion that life has anything to do with "nebulouspotentiality " or I I indefinable latency, " though we may agreewith the eminent author of the paragraph that everythingthat came from nebulous potentiality unquestionably willwend its way back to indefinable latency. Such a hypothesisof the origin and destiny of all things can have little interestfor us, all human and intellectual pursuits, hopes andinterests being in the ages separated from both vaporousextremes by hundreds of thousands of years and possibly bythe immeasurable, the incalculable, and the inconceivable.The changes in living matter have been attributed solely

to the chemical properties of the substances which con-stitute it. Undoubtedly chemical change occurs in theinternal actions of living matter ; but it is not the occur-rence of chemical, electrical or other form of physicalchange that is in any way disputed. Whilst it is certainthat chemical change takes place, it is equally certain that itdoes not occur until the elements of the matter about to

undergo change have been rearranged or caused to takeup certain positions with respect to one another, so

that they are brought within the range of their ordinaryaffinities. Now, this rearrangement of molecules andelements (?) is effected in a manner which cannot beimitated and which does not exhibit any analogy withany laboratory processes. It is this agent, force or

power which prepares for, as it were, the chemicalchange, and the way in which the necessity for such

power, corresponding to the skilled chemist in the laboratory,is ignored, is most curious. One would suppose that chemistshad discovered the means of effecting chemical changes intheir laboratories without their presence or interference, thework being somehow carried on of its own accord withoutchemist, chemicals or apparatus. One of the last authorita-tive utterances in the same physical direction was made bythe President of the British Association,3 who a few daysago spoke of "vital processes " and "vital energies "and "specific energy" without defining what he meant.He finds the "best examples of specific energy" inthe most "differentiated," "the highest structures."Evidently " specific energy" has its abode in very com-plex structures, but is there none in the simplest ? 1 "Vitalenergies," he said, "can be split into processes which areidentical in nature with those of the non-living world," butit is not stated what are the processes in the non-living world.

1 Rede Lecture, delivered at Cambridge on June 14th, 1893, by Pro-fessor Michael Foster, F.R.S., Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge.2 Romanes Lecture. Evolution and Ethics, delivered at Oxford,

May 18th, 1893, by Professor T. H. Huxley, F.R.S. (Macmillan & Co.)3 Presidential Address to the British Association on Sept. 13th, 1893,

by Professor J. S. Burdon-Sanderson, LL.D., D.C.L., F.R.S.

Ie spoke of " analysing a vital process into its physical ancL’hemical constituents," but can a vital process have physical,nd chemical constituents ? If so, surely it is a physical and:hemical process, and what is gained by calling it vital ? Butvhat is it, I would ask, that initiates, directs and controlshe physical and chemical changes and determines the specialiharacter of these in different kinds of living matter ? What-s that in the living matter which effects certain definite andrearranged changes in certain substances when broughtvithin the range of the influence of this living matter ? Doeslot this something seem to act, or really act the part of the:hemist in his laboratory, only more perfectly, more

juickly, more directly, and under conditions which would’ender it impossible for the chemist to work at allJr bring about changes like those taking place in the’

iving matter ? If vital energy can " be split into processes.dentical in nature with those of the non-living world," whats the difference between vital and non-vital energy? Whylot call both simple energy ? But if energy can itself be splitinto constituents how can it cause matter to be rearranged,j0 be split up into new substances? It can hardly be regarded;it the same time as operator and as the matter operated upon.More careful study of the chemical and physical molecularchanges and of the circumstances under which they occur will,f think, convince the mind that something far transcendingmy physical changes and of a different order or nature-is requisite before any adequate explanation concerning the-simplest life phenomena will be afforded. The more weknow about the non-living, the wider and deeper becomes thegulf by which it is and has been separated from the Nving.In all these physical and chemical hypotheses of life, whereis the evidence of progress ? The hypotheses, or rather con..

jectures, have been expressed in different language, variedfrom time to time, and many different words, some 01 rather-ambiguous character and not easy to define, have been

employed to make them intelligible ; but they are practisallyfancies, conjectures and assertions, as they were thirty years.ago. We have not advanced one step nearer the proaf thatlife is "energy "-" immanent," "specific" or cosmic, i)’1 dueto the properties of matter, or one with cosmic processes, ordue to chemical actions, or to machinery of molecular orother character, or to the influence of external conditions, 0:;1’

to environment or tendencies. Moreover, there is no evidence’whatever of any transition from any form of non-living tc,any form of living. Life therefore would seem to be farremoved from matter and its phenomena and must occupya place by itself and cannot be included in the category of’cosmic matter and cosmic processes.

It seems to me that the evidence in favour of the absoluteseparation between the living and the non-living state is con-clusive beyond question, whilst every attempt to prove the-contrary-that the living and non-living are one, or that thenon-living gradually passes into the living state-has signallyfailed. The nature of life has not been and cannot be demon--strated, but that life power belongs to a category far removedfrom that in which every form of energy, of chemical actionand of atomic machinery would be placed seems to me to beabundantly proved by scientific observation and experiment.All life from the lowest to the highest-from bacterium toman-at every period of existence, from its first appearanceon the earth to the present hour, is characterised by changesin matter that is colourless, structureless, mobile and semi-fluid. Whenever or wherever we study the process ofliving in the life-world we are at once face to facewith phenomena which are absolutely different in naturefrom any phenomena in the non-living world and whichhave not yet been adequately explained or accounted for.Much has been learned concerning them, and fact has been,and will doubtless continue to be, added to fact, but theexact nature of the simplest of the phenomena of any kindof living matter remains unknown. Speculation, conjecture,and very positive and very careless assertions with regard totendencies and prophecies abound, but so far scientificinquiry has failed. The statement that vital actions aremechanical and the superstition that in living matter

structure, although not to be demonstrated at this time,certainly exists, and will be demonstrated in the time tccome, scarcely belong to science. The system of referringthe solution of every difficulty to future time and the daringprophecies of "privileged spirits " as to what the explana-tion is to be are not in accord with the principles ofscience. The hypothesis that science has rendered the-

acceptance of Christianity, from the point of view of

reason, impossible has attained a popularity which is-

865

extraordinary, but it does not seem to occur to those who takethis view that the instant a prosecutor of science claimsspecial authority he abandons science, which rests upon the,results of observation and experiment and recognises noauthority. If a scientific man claims privilege to press upon- the public what he declares to be the tendency of thoughtand fails to support it by evidence he contravenes first

principles. The extended observation and more minute

investigation of living matter, so far from militating againstdie acceptance of belief in something superior to and capableof controlling matter and energy, even if it be very specific,clearly indicate that up to this time religious,beliefs are notin any way adversely affected by the latest results reached.The facts of observation and experiment are opposed to someof the most authoritative dogmas about the nature of life,such as "in matter alone is the promise and potency of alllife," "matter is all in all," "vital is included amongst thephysical forces." These and many more assertions in thesame direction are still strongly defended, but they have notbeen proved and will not bear debate, though possibly theymay still serve as the text for certain scientific sermons, as,they have already served for many years past.

All the ingenuity (and it has been great), all the speculation<and it has been very ingenious), and all the prophecy (and ithas been daring) have so far failed to persuade the livingparticle to reveal its secret. Though the life of man transcends’;n degree that of an organism so low as the bacterium, yetas regards the phenomena of the mere matter of the livingparticles there is much in common ; but to say that the lifeof man transcends that of the bacterium just as the lattertranscends the forces and properties of non-living matter isnot reasonable, and if gradation be admitted from the’bacterium to man no gradation whatever can be supposed bywhich the non-living shades into the living. The hiatus hasnot been bridged and cannot be bridged even in thought.atthistime. The difference remains absolute, not gradational.Most of the arguments of the scientific kind against beliefin God may be traced to the primary belief in the assumption,that the living and non-living are one, backed by ingeniousspeculations invented for the purpose of convincing peoplethat the facts of life, as well as those of nature, living and non-living, have been explained by physics and chemistry. Ithas been argued that, since in matter there are inherentforces and powers adequate to account for all forms of life,the idea of a superintending, governing power is no longerneeded to explain the facts familiar to us in living nature.But, so far from any such life properties or powers havingbeen proved to exist in any non-living matter whatever, thedirect contrary remains true, at least up to this very day, andthe advocates of the unity of life and non-life have been,driven to take refuge in the further assertion that thetendency of thought of the time is in the direction they indi-’cate. But tendencies are not scientific. No tendency canprove an adequate substitute for facts of observation and,experiment,’and by these we are compelled in the presentstate of knowledge to admit the influence in all things livingof some force or power above all forces and powers of whichthere is any indication in any kind of matter that has notbeen detached from matter already alive, and by these last only’can the facts of the living world be accounted for. As longas the absolute difference between the world of life and theworld of matter remains unshaken, as long as we remain&ucirc;gnorant of what happens when the living molecule com-municates its vital powers to molecules which are not alive,as long as the exact nature of the change when the livingparticle passes from life to death remains unknown, so

long will it be impossible, I venture to think, for those.guided by reason to accept arguments and assertionsurged against belief in God from the science side. In

trying to form a correct judgment concerning the all-

’Important question of the nature and source of life we mustbe careful to distinguish what may be or what might be fromwhat is capable of proof and has been actually demonstrated.Tendencies of thought, scientific prophecies, and the charm-ing fairy tales of scientific story tellers are for the delight of’scientific childhood and may still be harmlessly enjoyedduring the evolutionary period of machine development; butif we allow ourselves to he influenced by facts and reason we- lost conclude that life is not a property of matter, that theliving world and the non-living world are distinct, and thatthe former was not a natural outcome of the latter ; that ifall living things were destroyed the matter of their bodiesand the matter of the non-living world would remain in-lestructible, but would also remain incapable of giving rise

i to new life; and that up to this day it has not been shown that; fundamental religious beliefs have been shaken, destroyed, or rendered untenable by the wonderful truths which haveI been established by the unprecedented progress of scientificL discovery in every department of natural knowledge during; our time.

AbstractsOF

INTRODUCTORY LECTURES ETC.DELIVERED AT THE

LONDON AND PROVINCIAL MEDICALSCHOOLS

AT THE

Opening of the Session 1893-94.

GUY’S HOSPITAL.

PAPER READ BEFORE THE PHYSICAL SOCIETY BYDR. CLIFFORD BEALE.

AT the opening meeting of the Pupils’ Physical Societyat Guy’s Hospital a paper was read by Dr. ClifEora Beale,a former student at the hospital, on the "Advantagesand Disadvantages of Making Mistakes," of which the

following is an abstract. Referring to a saying of thelate American minister in London, to the effect that theman who never makes mistakes never makes anything, hepointed out that everyone who succeeds in life, and especiallythose who succeed rapidly, must make plenty of mistakes,but they must not make the same mistakes too frequently.The making of a mistake is only valuable when it serves tofix a fallacy in the mind and to nail it down, as base moneyis sometimes nailed down to a shop counter, as a reminder thatthe mistake has been made once and must not be made again.In medical work the opportunities for making mistakes besetone at every turn. We had to do not only with a very com-plex machine, the complete internal details of which we werefor ever striving to ascertain but never fully making out, butalso with the far more difficult problems of the power whichset this marvellous machine in action and controlled, alteredor stopped the machine altogether by processes at whichwe could only form a guess. No wonder then that wewere so frequently in error, when we tried to be positiveas to the exact causes of this or that irregularity, or that wefailed to set it right when we put our erroneous notions intopractice. Hence it came about that as time went on ourexperience of past mistakes expanded to such an extent thatif we had indeed kept account of them, nailed them down toour mental counters and made resolve that they shouldnot be committed again, we might have been appalled attheir number and to be haunted in our practice by the ghostsof former errors which rose up at inconvenient moments andwarned us of the dangers of too confident diagnosis. A greatliving authority had laid it down that all errors in diagnosiswere due either to ignorance or carelessness, and this severedictum was no doubt true in the main. Even the mostlearned and experienced physicians and surgeons mustconfess to a vast amount of ignorance, but it was ignoranceof the unknowable for the most part. Carelessness, on theother hand, was not protected by any such impassablebarriers as was the scope of knowledge and errors that weredue to carelessness must be classed as avoidable. Studentsmight best avoid them by making plenty of mistakes whilstthey could do so without personal discredit to themselvesand by learning what constituted medical carelessness whilstthey could do so with a minimum of inconvenience toothers. Mistakes of all sorts, whether in the applicationof theoretical or practical knowledge, must be madesooner or later, and if they were made during student lifethey might be profitable, but if committed in after life theywere by no means so. The most successful men in practicewere generally those who had not let themselves be deterredfrom making plenty of students’ mistakes by the fear of theconsequent ridicule. It must be remembered that althoughin the short period of hospital experience it was necessary tostudy disease it was still more necessary to study the patientwho was the victim of the disease. Nothing but systematicclinical study could impart that knowledge. The experience