D^{R.} BASTIAN DARWIN TYNDALL HUXLEY LORD KELVIN SPENCER MASTER THINKERS WHO HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO OUR KNOWLEDGE OF LIFE Photos by Gerschel, Maull & Fox, E. Walker, London Stereoscopic, Barraud, and Mills ] Thus, whether “Omne vivum ex vivo” be true or false to-day, we are compelled to accept the only other alternative, which is that it has not always been true, or, in other words, that life was spontaneously evolved from the lifeless (so-called) at some remote age in the past. Just at the present time philosophic biology is out of fashion. Minds of the great cast which endeavour to see things in their eternal aspect have been lacking to the science of life since the days when Huxley and Spencer were in the plenitude of their powers. Anyone who cares to compare the principal reviews of the last decade with those same reviews from the year of, say, 1875 to 1890, can readily see this fact for himself. In the absence of that deliberate thought and discussion without which clear ideas on any subject are impossible, what may be called the official opinion of biology at the present time is thus most remarkable and contradictory. On the one hand, it is strenuously asserted as a matter of dogma that at the present day no life is produced or producible upon the earth except by the process of reproduction of previously existing life; and on the other hand it is asserted--when the direct question is put, though otherwise the subject is simply ignored--that life must somehow or other have been naturally evolved in the past, presumably once and for all. I have called this opinion contradictory, and it is indeed far more contradictory and unsatisfactory than it may at present appear. The obvious question that the critic asks is, “If then, why not now?” [Sidenote: “If then, why not now?”] [Sidenote: Is Life Now Arising from the Lifeless?]