Wellington Philosophical Society.

Transactions and Proceedings of the Royal Society of New Zealand, Volume 27, 1894, Unnumbered Page

Wellington Philosophical Society. First Meeting: 13th June, 1894. Major-General Schaw, President, in the chair. New Member.—Mr. P. W. Tait. A copy of vol. xxvi. of the “Transactions and Proceedings of the New Zealand Institute,” and copies of the Proceedings of the Society for last year, were laid on the table. Address by the President.—“The Last Glacial Epoch: explained by Major-General Drayson's Discovery of the Second Rotation of the Earth.” (Transactions, p. 513.) Sir James Hector proposed a cordial vote of thanks to the President. At the same time, as he had been specially asked to express an opinion, he must dissent from any view of the cause of the Glacial period that rested on the occurrence of astronomical cycles. Geological evidence was opposed to such regular cycles. The period since the great Ice Age in the north is quite insignificant compared with the immense time preceding, covering all the Tertiary and Secondary formations, during which evidence of extreme refrigeration is wanting. He described the glacial phenomena of New Zealand, which indicated a former greater extent and altitude of the land, with broad, lofty plateau-ridges that formed breeding-grounds for glaciers that have since eaten their way back, and converted the plateaux into sharp ridges and peaks. This, with the subsequent depression of the land, attended by changes in the distribution of shore-lines and ocean-currents, he thought, might be quite sufficient to account for the former great extent of glaciers in New Zealand. Of former glacial action, in the usual sense of the word, there was no evidence in the New Zealand islands. Mr. Travera had great pleasure in seconding the vote of thanks, which was carried. He could not, however, agree with the views of Major-General Drayson either as to the causes for or the period at which the last glacial epoch took place. His views upon these points were entirely opposed to those of astronomers, geologists, and writers on biological matters, especially as affecting the distribution of plants and animals in the regions subjected to glaciation during that epoch; and it would certainly be extraordinary if such men as Laplace, Leverrier, Adams, the Herschels, and a host of other astronomical observers and writers who had dealt with the motions of the earth, should have altogether overlooked so important a matter as that which is involved in General Drayson's supposed discovery, or that such a discovery, though propounded nearly twenty years ago, should ever since have been, as it is, entirely ignored. It is suggested that this has been the result of jealousy; but it is impossible to suppose that the host of great men who have dealt with the question under discussion, and whose sole desire has been to discover the truth, could have been actuated by so unworthy a feeling if there had really been anything in it. The occurrence of the glaciation referred to, and its extent, are unquestionable. That it was partly due to astronomical causes and partly to changes in the distri-

bution of land and water has been clearly enough established by the writings of Croll, Geikie, and others, which are admirably summed up in Mr. A. R. Wallace's interesting work on “Island Life,” in which he also gives a very complete account of the distribution of plants and animals within the area affected, and it is impossible to rise from the perusal of this work without being convinced that the causes mentioned were sufficient to bring about the effects investigated without resorting to such an hypothesis as that propounded by General Drayson. The General assumed, too, that the glaciation in question completed its retreat from the area affected within the historic period, for he fixed it at about eight thousand years ago. It would be curious if the area now occupied by England and Ireland—all of which, except a small portion of the more mountainous districts, was absolutely hundreds of fathoms deep below sea-level during the glaciation—should, when the Phoenicians traded to it, upwards of three thousand years ago, have been found inhabited by a race so far civilized as to carry on mining operations and the manufacture of metals, clothed with forest, and possessing a fauna since but little changed, but which had unquestionably for ages after the close of the glacial epoch been roamed over by the lion, the hyena, the cave-bear, the rhinoceros, and other animals not found in Europe for thousands of years anterior to the period of the Phoenicians' visits. These animals could only have found their way there when England became, on its re-emergence, united with the Continent of Europe by a tract of intervening land, which has since disappeared owing to a fresh subsidence. The commencement of the glacial epoch in the Northern Hemisphere has been fixed by Croll and others at about 260,000 years ago, and its termination at about 80,000 years ago, for during the whole of the intervening period the eccentricity of the earth's orbit was at its maximum, and winter occurred there when the sun was in aphelion. These, combined with matters affecting the then distribution of the land and water within the districts affected, seem fully to account for the occurrence of the glacial epoch; and much more cogent grounds than those advanced by General Drayson would be necessary to displace those upon which the authors referred to have based the views they have propounded. Mr. Blair said that there were two works lately published by Sir H. Howorth, K.C.I.E., F.R.S.—viz., “The Mammoth and the Flood” and “The Glacial Nightmare”—which threw quite a new light on this glacial question, and which the President had not seen. He would also call the President's attention to the remarks on these works in the Quarterly Review of January, 1888, and January, 1894. There seemed to be great difference of opinion on the subject, and it had been by no means settled. Instead of glacial action, we must look to that of water and snow. Mr. M. Chapman had a great deal to say on the subject; but, unfofortunately, there was no time at present. General Schaw remarked that General Drayson had stated facts, and no one had yet contradicted them, and he did not think they could. Second Meeting: 27th June, 1894. Major-General Schaw, President, in the chair. New Member.—Mr. A. R. Atkinson. Papers.—1. “On the Abundance of Vanessa itea in Wellington during Season 1894,” by W. P. Cohen. (Transactions, p. 281.)

Mr. Travers said he thought that this was the same butterfly that Mr. Hudson called Pyrameis. He had met with it often in Wellington and other places in New Zealand. Mr. Hudson said that Vanessa was the old name and Pyrameis the new. There was a slight difference in the wings. V. itea was found in New Zealand and Australia, and Pyrameis in New Zealand only. Mr. Maskell said he was glad to see a young member presenting a paper of this kind. Mr. Cohen had some good collections, and frequently exhibited them at the meetings; but this was the first time he had communicated his observations to the Society. 2. “Illustrations of Darwinism; or, The Avifauna of New Zealand considered in relation to the Fundamental Law of Descent with Modification,” by Sir W. Buller, K.C.M.G., F.R.S. (Transactions, p. 75.) Mr. Maskell did not intend to discuss the paper at length, as he could not follow distinctly the whole of the paper. In dealing with the subject he did not think the author had gone below the surface. He had not contradicted any of the fundamental arguments against the Darwinian theory. He thought it a great pity that the author had referred in the manner he did in his introduction to the papers by the President and Mr. Coleman Phillips—personality on such occasions should be avoided as much as possible, and members should not be held up to ridicule. He would recommend the author to withdraw the remarks in the introduction before he submitted it for publication. Mr. Travers said he was a follower of Darwin's doctrines, and he had made many observations similar to those mentioned by Sir W. Buller on the subject. He mentioned the disappearance of forms of life which occupied a conspicuous place in former years, and he referred to instances of variation of form, plumage, and colour that he had observed in plants and animals. He did not think the paper just read contained views that would excite controversy. There was nothing really very new in it. Mr. Field described specimens of birds in New Zealand which are quite different from anything described in Sir W. Buller's work on the birds of New Zealand, especially as regards colour, and this, he thought, would favour the development theory. He mentioned many instances of this in ferns and other plants. Mr. Carlile, as an outsider as regards natural science, said he would not have presumed to intervene in a discussion of this sort if it were not that Darwinism had now taken possession of the whole field of human knowledge. It had given a human interest to science. Nowadays, when one endeavoured to follow such a discussion as the recent one between Weismann and Herbert Spencer, on such a point perhaps as the cause of the change of structure in the heads of the soldier-ants, he found that he was really engaged on a question that had an interest bearing on important social problems. It bore, for instance, on such a question as that of whether habitual drunkenness could be inherited or not. The greater interest nowadays attaching to science would probably secure for it in the future that leading position in the curricula of our universities that had been often claimed for it. Evolution was one thing, but evolution by means of purely fortuitous variations was another. Sir W. Buller had adduced the case of protective colouring as a case of Darwinian evolution. It was, however, rather a difficulty in the way of the acceptance of the theory. One could understand how even the smallest degree of added swiftness in a young fish would assist it to escape its enemies, and so tend to the perpetuation of the type; but it was impossible to understand how the initial stage in the variation—from brown to green, say—could have any preservative effect at all.

Mr. Tanner said he did not think the question of Darwinism could be discussed without the display of a considerable amount of feeling. He did not think Sir W. Buller's remarks at the opening were intended to hurt any one's feelings. Mr. R. Pharazyn thought the paper a most interesting one. He thought it was quite possible to convince people that the Darwinian theory was sound. He agreed generally with the views expressed in the paper. General Schaw took the author's views on the subject, which were opposed to his own, as merely a friendly attack. He did not think Sir W. Buller had brought forward sufficient evidence to prove the views he advanced. He himself was a believer in evolution, but only as far as theory was supported by facts. There was no evidence of steps leading up to the development referred to by Sir Walter Buller; we had not yet got hold of the whole facts of the case; there was still something required in addition to Darwin's views to make the matter plain—some great laws, as yet unknown, in obedience to which new types of life had appeared. Sir W. Buller, in reply, said it was hardly necessary to disclaim any intention of reflecting offensively on the President or any member of the Society. The common-sense of those present would bear him out in that. The President had, in his inaugural address, thrown down the gauntlet, and openly invited discussion. He had seized the first opportunity of meeting that challenge, and he hoped that both the President and Mr. Maskell were prepared to fight for their views. For his own part, he would always be ready to combat to the utmost of his power doctrines which he regarded as unorthodox in the light of modern science. Had he sat silently by and allowed such views as those he had criticized to go forth in our Transactions unchallenged he would have felt self-convicted of moral cowardice. His duty to a society which had honoured him by election to the presidential chair four times over, his duty to science, and his duty to the memory of the great and good Darwin, who twenty years ago had been one of his (Sir Walter's) proposers for the Royal Society, all required that he should speak out with no uncertain sound. He added that the President, in the explanatory observations he had made that evening, following the lines of his former address, had opened up new debatable ground; but the hour was too late to admit of anything further being said on the subject. Sir James Hector drew attention to a series of most interesting photographs of Rarotonga, kindly exhibited by His Excellency the Governor, Lord Glasgow (who was present); also some moa-bones found by Mr. Donne in the Wairarapa district. Third Meeting: 11th July, 1894. Mr. W. M. Maskell in the chair. New Members.—Rev. C. S. Ogg, Mr. H. P. Hanify, Mr. H. N. McLeod, and Dr. Adams.

Auckland Institute.

Philosophical Institute of Canterbury.

. During the year seven ordinary meetings have been held, at which twenty-six papers have been read. These may be classified as follows Zoology, 6; geology, 2; botany, 3; chemistry, 3; physics, 11; pure mathematics, 1. This list shows a slight increase as compared with last year's. The membership now stands at sixty-six, which is the same as last year; but the number of associates has risen to seventy-six. The library has been increased by the usual periodicals and donations, but it has been enriched especially by the Proceedings of the Linnean Society of New South Wales. The photographic section still continues to be a flourishing branch of the Institute. The attendance at its meetings is very large, and in September it held one of the most successful exhibitions ever held in the colony. The balance-sheet shows that the total receipts for the year have been £80 2s. 5d., and the total expenditure £71 1s. 6d., which, with last year's balance of £32 10s., leaves a credit balance of £41 10s. 11d.

Otago Institute.

Westland Institute.

Hawke's Bay Philosophical Institute.

Nelson Philosophical Society.