^6o ANIMALCULA OF INFUSIONS. I^ 



I did it with impartiality and friendfhip. The 

 work appeared 1,762 : I haftened to fend it to 



him J 



ceffitated to interrogate nature further, in hopes of dif- 

 covering feme decifive fafl. But my future obfervations 

 favoured the pre-exiilence of germs as much as they contra- 

 difted the Epigenefis. This I have attempted to demon- 

 ilrate in thj Differ tation pubhfhed fome time ago, (Saggio 

 di Ofiervazioni Microfcopiche.) 



Needham's too great anxiety to prcdift the refult of my 

 obfervations has rendered him a falfe prophet. But I can- 

 iiOt.be filent on another predidion by Bonnet, though very 

 different from his, as it has been fulfilled. After quoting 

 Needham's letter in the Corps Organifest he does not hefi- 

 tate to afHrm that the oBfervations of the Reggio Profeffor 

 will not demonflrate that animalcula have fo extraordinary 

 an origin as he would afcribe to them. It fhould be re- 

 inarked, that I was then unacquainted with M. Bonnet, 

 xior had I even read his Corps Organifes. 



The Englifh philofopher, though a pfeudo prophet, has 

 given my obfervations a very gracious reception ; he has 

 approved of them ; and does not conceal that they have in- 

 duced him to change his opinion. I fhall mention what 

 he WTOte to M. Bonnet and myfelf on the fubjeft, to fhew 

 that although he was remote from real philofophy for a 

 time, he afterwards approached it, and did not always re- 

 main in error. 



* The fingular agreement of your obfervations with my 

 \ remarks/ M. Bonnet writes, * gives me the greateH: 



* plcafure^ 



