and their fuppofcd Poifon. 75 



in ^arniola, merely that he might have the pleafure of giving' 

 to each the name of feme illuftrious perfcm who has pro- 

 moted the fcicnce of entomology. This mark of honour is 

 of little confequence to fuch great Mecenases, and the in- 

 convenience of increafirto; and confufing the received nomen- 

 clature is very great. 



The public care little alfo for th? cxaft defcriptions of na- 

 turalifts, and their methodic clallifications. They require 

 facts; fomethirig wonderful and extraordinary. They willi 

 that every natural being fliould prefcnt fomc new phenome- 

 non ; an obje6l of immediate utility, or_ a fubjcft of repro- 

 bation : and when their prejudices are once eftabliflicd, no- 

 thing can deftroy them. Sometimes, for the truth mull be 

 confefled, naturalifts in their writings have been the fource 

 of errors and prejudices. Were we to correft the aflertions 

 of Plinv, Johnfton, Mouffet, and Aldrovandi, authors ftill 

 quoted, and which one cannot read with patience, rcfpefting 

 infecls only, w-e fliould make a large book of controverfies, 

 which would ferve neither to inftruft the learned, nor to un- 

 deceive the people, always wedded to their ignorance. 



The hidory of fpiders, and that of the effeiSls of ihoir 

 venom, w-ere it properly treated, would alone furnilh matter 

 for an ample chapter. What variety in the fenfalious of 

 man ! Some have an invincible averfion to fpiders ; and 

 there are women who faint at the bare mention of their 

 name''': others treat them with familiarity, and think it an 



act 



• This antipa'hy is no tcTs ftrong, tlioiigh often more reafonabic, 

 among the men. M. Zimmerman relates the followini^ fingul.ir inftaiice of 

 it, to which he was a witntfs : — " Being one day in ;in Englifli company," 

 fays he, " confiding of pcrlons of diftinftion, the converfation hippeiicd 

 to fall upon antipathies. The greater part of the company denied the re- 

 ality of them, and treated them as old women's tales ; but I told them that 

 antipathy was a real difcafc. Mr. William Matthew, Ton of the governor 

 of Bar!)adocs, was of my opinion; and, as he added that he had himfclf 

 an extreme antipathy to fpiders, he was laughed at by the whole company. 

 I (hewed them, hoxvc.'cr, that this was a real inipreffion in his mind, ro- 

 fulting from a mechanical cffcft. Mr. John Murray, afterwards Duke of 

 Atho^, took it into his head to m-ske, in Mr. Matthew's prtfvnce, a fpider 

 of black wax, to try whether this antipathy would ajipear merely on a 

 liglit of the irifift. He wan out of the ryom, therefore, and returned wieU 



hi a bit 



