the Human Kind and other Animals, 279 



disease ; and, if I do not mistake, the ingenious Mr. 

 John Hunter has somewhere observed, that he often 

 found scrophulous disease in the Monkeys*, and even 

 in the Turkeys, which he had dissected. The turkey, 

 I well know, is very remarkably subject to disease of 

 the liver. 



On the subject of Rickets, I shall not venture to say- 

 any thing positive. I believe, however, that this is a 

 disease to which other animals, besides man, are liable ; 

 and, it may not be improper to add, that there are whole 

 nations of men, who appear to be entirely exempt from 

 this disease. Such, not to mention others, are many of 

 the Indian tribes of North- America (and, no doubt, 

 South- America also), among whom we have never been 

 able to detect any appearances of ricketsf. 



Of " Venerea lues," or the Venereal disease, what 

 shall I say ? I know that some of the ablest writers 

 have asserted, and they sometimes appeal to their expe- 

 riments, that man alone is the victim of this disease, the 

 offspring of " unlawful love." But many more experi- 

 ments should be made (if, indeed, it be advisable to 

 make any experiments on this subject) before it would 

 be safe to admit the position, that to the dog and other 

 animals, the disease of syphilis is wholly unknown, 



* It forms no part of my object to assert, that the disease of scro- 

 phula is found in Monkeys, because Negroes are very subject to 

 t'his affection. 



f It may be worth observing, in this place, that scrophulous af- 

 factions arc Tint uncommon anvincr the North-American Indians. 



