BITE or tus RATTLE-SNAKE. 103 
moir, which I hope to Jay before the Society, fome time in. 
the courfe of the enfuing year. At prefent, I thall only 
remark that there is reafon to believe, the praétice which 
I have defcribed has often beenemployed for the bites of 
ferpents which do not belong to our venemous tribes. ThisI 
know tobe the cafe with refpect to our Wampum-Snake, the 
Coluber faf/ciatus of Linnzus: for, a careful examination of 
this ferpent and a curious inquiry into its hiftory, have 
convinced me that its bite, likethat of many other fpecies of 
the exteniive genus of Coluber, is really harmlefs. Ie 
would be uncandid not to obferve that Mr. Catefby, who. 
has given a delcription and a good figure of the Wampum- 
Snake, in his Natura! Hiftory of Carolina, &c .* was of the 
fame opinion long before me. I may alfo remark that 
Linneus, in his Sy/ema Nature{, has not annexed to the 
Coluber fafciatus that mark by which he defignates the fer« 
pents which he fuppofed to be venemous. But the Swedifly 
naturalift does. not feem to have been. certain that: 
his Coluber is that deferibed’and figured by Catefby, 
under the name of the Wampum-Suake. From comparing, 
however, the animal itfelf with: the defcriptions of Cateiby 
and Linnzus,fam confident that the Wampum-Snake of 
Pennfylvania, Carolina, &c. isno other than the Coluber 
fafciatus of the Sytem of Nature. 
But to return from what is rather a digreffion, In the 
fimple practice which I have deferibed, I am difpofed to 
repofe great confidence. Nor can I have any doubt that 
the beneticial effe€ts which have been experienced under: 
the employment of the multifarious means I have menti- 
oned, are to be attributed principally to the ufe of the li- 
gature, tothe fcarification of the wounded part, the appli- 
cation of the falt, the gunpowder and the blifter. I thail 
not deny that fome of the vegetables which were exhibit 
ed 
* See Volume 2d, p. 58 and t. 58. 
+ See Volume rift, p. 373. Vienna edition of 1767, 
