REVIEWS.

Evening Star, Issue 3125, 24 February 1873, Page 3

REVIEWS.

As regards Protoplasm , by James Hutchison Stirling, F.R.C.S., and LL.D., Edinburgh ; Longmans, Green and Co., Lon-

don ; Keith and Wilkie, Dunedin, On Sunday evening, November 8, 18G8, Professor T, H. .Huxley, LL. it,' Kh S., delivered in Ediu 1 nrgh the tirst of a series of evening addresses upon non-theologicd topics, instituted by the Reverend J. Crau brook tne of these was on the “ Physical Basis of Li'e,” which term the learned Professor used to explain the word “Protoplasm.” The su stance of that lecture has siuce been published, and as it ;s written in a most interesting and popular .-tyle, it will well repay the reading. But that term, 14 Physical Basis of Life, ” may seem by raan> to shadow forth such abstruse resea ch as to prevent their turning their attention to tin* subject. An extract from Professor Huxley’s able essay will tend to dispel this idea ; What, truly, can seem to be more obviously different from one another, in faculty, in form, and in substance, than the various kinds of living beings ? What community of faculty can there be between the brightly-colored lichen, which so nearly resembles a mere mineral incrustation of the bare rock on which it grows, and the painter, to whom it is instinct with beauty, or the botan'st, whom it feeds with knowledge ? Again, think of the microscopic fungus—a mere infinitesimal ovoid particle, which finds space and duration enough to multiply into countless millions in the body of a living fly ; and then of the wealth of foliage, the luxuriance qf flower and fruit, which lies between this bald sketch of a plant ami the giant pine of California, towering to the dimensions of a cathedtn} spire, or the Indian fig, which covers acres «ith its profound shadow, and endures while nations arid empires come and go around its vast circumference.- Or, turning to the other half of tire world of life, picture to yourselves the great Finner whale, hugest of beasts that live, or have lived, disporting his eighty or ninety feet ot bone, muscle, and blubber, with easy roll, among waves in which the stoutest ship that ever left dockyard would founder hopelessly ; and contrast him with the invisible animalcules —mere gelatinous specks multitudes of which could, in fact, dance upon the point of a needle with the same ease as the angels of the Schoolmen could, in imagination. With these images before your minds, you may well ask, what community of form, or structure, is there between the animalcule and the whale; or between the fungus and the fig-tree ? And, a fortiori, between aP four ?

finally, if we regal’d substance, or material composition, what hidden bond can connect the flower which a girl wears in her hair and the blood which courses through her youthful veins; or, what is there in common between the dense and resisting mass of the oak, or the strong fabric of the tortoise, and those broad discs of glassy jelly which'may be seen pulsating through the waters of a calm sea, but which drain away to mere films iu the hand which raises them out of their clement

It will create no surprise, after reading this extract, that the Professor traces all forms of physical life to a iriaterid combination, which, chemically examined with even the best apparatus, does not appear to differ in the various plants and animals. He a Imits that of necessity it must be modified by life in its various forms, but hj) confines hia theory to the material; and lest it should be imagined he holds materialistic views, he concludes by recommending men not to trouble themselves with matters “of Which, however impoVtant they may be, we do know nothing, and can know nothing.” It would appear that Professor Stirling did not consider the views of Dr Huxley sound ; and in order to correct what he conceive! likely to lead to wrong impressions, he wrote the essays now published “As regards Protoplasm.” The intellectual wrestling of learned men is never without iutere-t. They do not always treat each other quite fairly. We think, taking into consideration that Dr Huxley was endeavoring to bring down a Very abstruse subject to the apprehension of a mixed audience—confessedly a tax in wliich even the highest genius cannot always succeed — it should not Lave been expected of him to bo so precise in definition, and exact in illustration, ns if the lecture were intended to be an exhaustive treatment of . the subject. We do not think that Dr Stirling has made sufficient allowance for this; nor lias he always dealt fairly with Dr Huxley’s views as expressed. He has assumed, for instance, that it was asserted that “protein” and “protoplasm” are exchangeable terms, although the passage is, |‘if we use tips term (protein) with such caution as may properly arise out of 6ur comparative ignorance of the things for which it stands, it may be truly said, that all protoplasm is proteinaceous.” We do not' see, on the whole, that the two professors differ very materially in their views on the matter One may be somewhat more advanced than the other, but this may fairly Ire accounted for by the difference of object each had'in view. Dr Huxley’s work was to give a popular lecture—some latitude, therefore, must he ■ allowed; .Dr Stirling’s was lo point out its weak points. The latter may, therefore, be very profitably read in , the light if aeoapletteot to the vtWr.

The Cabinet Dictionary of the English Language, with 750 illustrations, Collins, Sons and Co., London and Glasgow ; Keith and V.’ilkio, Dunedin. 7'hia is a neat and comprehensive dictionary, adapted to the times in which we live ; by which wc wrih it to be understood it is r.ot a mere catalogue of words, with the r bare definitions and pares of speech. 77iat would nob meet present requirements ; for strict accuracy in the use of words and terms is now expected in correspondence. While, therefore, Johnson’s or Walkers abridged did very well twenty or thirty years ago, the present generation needs mole. Not onlv must a dictionary, to be useful, record the word and its meaning, it must have the derivatives added, so that the precise limits of its application may bo ascertained. The Cabinet dictionary combines the advantages of explaining the meanings, pronunciation, and derivation of English words, aud where a name requires illustiation, in order that it may not be meaningless, a wood engtaving is given of the object. In the appendix are several useful glossaries, giving fureign words and phrases trora the Greek, Latin, and modern languages, Scotch words and phrases, gods and hcroet. of the Heathen Mythology, prefixes, affixes, aud formative syllables, proper names, abbreviations, and arbitrary signs in writing and 'printing. We commend the Cabinet Dictionary as a very useful work.