THE REV.  DR. AVELING said: 

There was one point that the lecturer made which, I think, might be a fit and fruitful subject for discussion.  He said that we were the product of the city.  To a great extent that is undoubtedly true; but on the other hand, he advocated an improvement in the conditions of environment, to be brought about by our own endeavours.  Therefore, the city can be shaped and made by us.  What, then, is the exact value to be given to the seemingly contradictory doctrines that the individual is the product of the city and also that the city is the product of the citizen?  The establishing of some fixed relation between—­or the adjusting of the relations of—­these two causes of social progress would be, I think, interesting to the philosopher, and useful to the economist.  The problem is [Page:  115] without doubt a difficult one, but its solution would be of great value.  I do not venture to offer any answer to the question I raise—­I merely state it.

MR. A.W.  STILL said: 

We have been passing through a period in which the city has created a type of man so wholly absorbed in the promotion of his own individual interests that he tends almost entirely to forget the social obligations which ought to make the greatest appeal to him.  We may take some hope from what Professor Geddes has said, that the time is coming when we shall bring the force of our own characters to bear on our environment, and endeavour to break away from conditions which have made us the slaves of environment.  I know the lovely little garden city of Bourneville intimately, and some of the experiments in other quarters.  But in the common expansion of cities, I have seen that as the people get away from one set of slums, they are creating new areas which will become as degraded and abominable as those which are left behind.  It has always seemed to me that there is room for good work by some committee, or some body of men, who would be voluntary guardians of the city’s well-being, who would make it their business to acquire all that knowledge which Professor Geddes has just put before us in terms so enchanting, and would use all the ability that they possess in order to lead the minds of the community towards the cultivation of the best and highest ideals in civic life.  I do not think it need be regarded as impossible that, from an association of this kind, such a movement as I have mentioned should spring.  I conceive the possibility of each group developing into a trust, capable of acting in the interests of the city in years to come, exercising a mighty influence, being relied upon for guidance, and administering great funds for the common good.  If we could get in each of our populous centres a dozen thoroughly intelligent broad-minded men, capable of watching all the streams of tendency—­all the developments of civic life, bringing their judgment to bear on its progress, and urging the public to move in the right direction,