The Portland daily press., 1874-10-02
Prof. Huxley's Address.


He turned his attention to Descartes as the
founder of modern biology, and discussed the
hypothesis of animal automatiSm, the physi-
cal theory of memory, etc. Professor Hux-
ley does not think that animals are insensible
machines, though this is apart from the ques-
ton of their possession of souls which may or
may not be immortal.
But must say for myself-looking at the
matter on the ground of analogy-taking in
to account that great doctrine of continuity
which forbds one to suppose that any natural
phenomena can come into existence suddenly
and without some precedent, gradual moditi-
cation tending toward it-taking that great
doctrine into account-(and everything we
know OF science tends to confirm it) and TAX
ing into account on the other hand the incon-
trOyertible fact that the lower animals which
possess brains at all possess, at any rate, in
rudiments part of the brain, which we have
every reason to believe is the organ of con.
sciousness in ourselves, then it seems vastly
more probable that the lower animals. al
though they may not possess that sort of con-
sciousness which we have ourselves, yet have
it in form proportional to the comparative
development of the organ of that conscious
ness, aud foreshadow more or less dimly those
feelings which we possess ourselves. think
that is, probably, the most rational conclu-
sion that can be come to.
The whole address was delivered without
note, and without having been written out
and committed to memory-it had been only
thought out. We imagine few men living can
talk, extempore, in the noble language, with
which the address concludes:
Logical consequences can take care of them
selves. The only question for any man to ask
is this: SIS this true or is it false?" No
other question can possibly be taken into con-
sideration until that one is settled. Zap
plause.) Undoubtedly do not hold that the
view have taken of the relations between
the physical and mental faculties of brutes ap-
plies in its fullness and entirety to man; and
if it was true that the logical consequences
of that belief must land me in all these terri
BILE things / do not hesitate in allowing my
self to be so landed. 1 should conceive that
if refused l should have done the greatest
and most abominable violence to everything
which is deepest in my moral nature. Cap
plause) But now 1 beg leave to say, that
in my conviction, there is no such logical con-
nection as is pretended between the doctrine l
accept and the consequences which people pro-
fess to draw from it. (Cheers.) Many years ago
had occasion, in dealing with the philosophy
of Descartes, and some other matters, to
state my conviction pretty fully on those sub
jjects, and, although l know by experience
how futile it is to endeavor to escape from
those nick-names which many people mis-
take for argument, Qaughter,) yet if those
who care to investigate these matters in a
spirit of candor and justice will look into
those writings of mine, they will see my rea'
sons for not imagining that such conclusions
can be drawn from such premises. To those
who do not look into this matter with can
dor and with a desire to know the truth l
have nothing whatever to say, except to
warn them on their own behalf what they
do; for assuredy if, for preaching such doc
trine as I have preached to you tonight,
am cited before the bar of public opinlon,n
shall not stand there alone. On my one
hand shall have, among theologians, St.
Augustine, John Calvin, and man whose
name should be well known to the Presby
terians OF Ulster-Jonathan Edwards-un-
less, indeed, it be the fashion to neglect the
study of the great masters of divinity, as
many other great studies are neglected now
adays. (Cheers.) 1 should have upon my
other hand, among the philosophers, Leib-
nitz; should have Pere Malbranche, who
saw all thugs in God; should have David
Hartley, the theologian as well as philoso-
pher; should have Charles Bonnet, the
eminent naturalist, and one of the most
jealous defenders christianity has ever had.
think should have within easy reach at
any rate, John Locke. Certainly the school
OF Decartes would be there, if not their mas
ter; and / am inclined to think, in due JUS
tice, citation would have to be served upon
Emmanuel Kant himself. (Laughter.) In
such society it may be better to be prisoner
than Judge; but would ask those who are
likely to be influenced by the din and clamor
which are raised about these questions
whether they are more likely to be right in
assuming that those great men l have men,
tioned-the fathers of the church and the
fathers of philosophy knew what they were
about. or that the pigmies who raise this din
know better than they did what they meant
loud cheers.) 1t is not necessary for any
man to occupy himself with problems of this
kind unless he so choose. Life Is full
enough, filled amply to the brim, by the per-
formance of its ordinary duties; but let me
warn you, let me beg you to believe that Ii a
man elect to give a judgment upon these
great questions; still more, If he assume to
himself the responsibility of attaching praise
or blame to his fellow men for the judgments
which they may venture to express, say
that, unless he would commit a sin more
grievOus than most of the breaches of the
Decalogue, let him avoid lazy reliance
upon the information that is gathered from
prejudice and filtered through passion.
Let him 60 to these great sources that are
open to him as to every one, and to no man
more open than an Englishman; let him go
back to the facts OF nature, and to the
thoughts of those wise men who for genera
tions past have been the interpreters Of
nature. e5