In fact, Thomas Huxley's famous essay on life's origins show just how important a part of evolutionary theory the question is.
Said Huxley (in part:
“And looking back through the prodigious vista of the past, I find no record of the commencement of life, and therefore I am devoid of any means of forming a definite conclusion as to the conditions of its appearance. Belief, in the scientific sense of the word, is a serious matter, and needs strong foundations. To say, therefore, in the admitted absence of evidence, that I have any belief as to the mode in which the existing forms of life have originated, would be using words in a wrong sense. But expectation is permissible where belief is not; and if it were given me to look beyond the abyss of geologically recorded time to the still more remote period when the earth was passing through physical and chemical conditions, which it can no more see again than a man can recall his infancy, I should expect to be a witness of the evolution of living protoplasm from not living matter. I should expect to see it appear under forms of great simplicity, endowed, like existing fungi, with the power of determining the formation of new protoplasm from such matters as ammonium carbonates, oxalates and tartrates, alkaline and earthy phosphates, and water, without the aid of light. That is the expectation to which analogical reasoning leads me; but I beg you once more to recollect that I have no right to call my opinion anything but an act of philosophical faith.”
(Biogenesis and Abiogenesis 1870 Essay)
Huxley was well thought of by Darwin for his zeal in propagating the “Gospel” of evolution so when Huxley speaks of the ‘evolution of life from non-living matter’ he speaks
like a high priest in The Temple of Darwinism.
Now as then, life from inert matter is an “act of philosophical faith”.
Why does the fact that he wrote an article on abiogenesis show that it’s an important part of evolutionary theory?
Huxley wrote articles on a wide range of subjects, most of which had nothing or little to do with evolution.
In fact, in this article he no where even discusses evolution (he used the term “evolution”, but not in the sense of “the theory of evolution” or Darwinism).
In fact, interestingly, in this, his inaugural address as president of the BAAS, this “Darwin’s Bulldog” never mentions Darwin - but he does repeatedly mention Pasteur and sing his praises (as he does in many other speeches and publications - he could have been called “Pasteur’s Bulldog”).