HISTORY OF ZOOPHYTOLOGY. 9 



vocacy of the new doctrine was in a more popular style, but not 

 the less excellent. He gave a short exposition of the ascertained 

 facts, — reviewed with the clearness of an eye-witness the dis- 

 coveries of Trembley, — pointed out their relations to the ex- 

 periments of Jussieu and Guettard, and how they mutually lent 

 and borrowed strength, — palliated and explained away his for- 

 mer opposition to Peyssonnel, — and declared his complete faith 

 in the animality of Zoophytes, and his conviction that a nume- 

 rous list of productions hitherto unexamined would be found to 

 be of the same nature. " All that we have said," he thus con- 

 cludes, " of the polypes of the sea, is merely a sort of adver- 

 tisement which, however, cannot fail to produce the effect which 

 we promise ourselves from it : it will direct undoubtedly the 

 curiosity of naturalists who reside by the sea to insects so worthy 

 of being better known. They will seek out the different species ; 

 they will delight to describe to us the varieties presented in 

 their forms never but remarkable ; they will study the figure 

 and disposition of the cells of the various species, their manner 

 of growth and reproduction and wherewithal they are nourished ; 

 they will in short, place in a clear light every thing that has 

 reference to the different polypidoms and their formation, so 

 that a department of natural history, so interesting, so new, and 

 as yet only sketched in outline, may be rendered as perfect as 

 it merits to be." * 



The appeal, eloquent as it was and from one having great 

 influence, was however made in vain ; for whether from the in- 

 veteracy of habit and our fondness of opinions long cherished, 

 or from the fewness of the published observations whence the 

 general conclusion was drawn, it seems certain that the new doc- 



ccrtains temps, et qiii dans d'autres rentroient en entier dans leur petite cellide, 

 hors de laquelle leur partie posterieure ne se tiouvoit jamais. Enfin, il (B. de 

 Jussieu) reconnut que plusieurs espeees de ces corps, dont chacun avoit I'ex- 

 terieur d'une tres-belle plante, n'etoient que des assemblages d'un nombre pro- 

 digieiLx de cellules de polypes ; en un mot, que plusieurs de ces productions de 

 la mer, que tous les botanistes que les ont decrites ont prises"pour des plantes 

 et ont fait representer comme telles avec complaisance, n'etoient que des poly- 

 piers.'" — Preface, Vol. vi. p. 71, 72. See also Amoenitates Aradeinicse, Vol. i. 

 p. 185, for an enumeration of the species of Sertularia, &c., which Jussieu had 

 examined, and considered to be animal productions. His account, however, of 

 the animal of the Sertularia? is altogether erroneous. 



" Memoires pour servir a I'histoire des Insectes, Tome sixieme, Paris, 1742. 

 Quarto. Preface, from p. 68 to p. 80. 



