APPENDIX. 109 



say he (actually) had seen them. I cannot therefore think it 

 worth while to take any farther notice of these conclusions. 



It is indeed remarkable that Dr. Monro could persuade 

 himself he had any original merit even in entertaining such 

 suspicions and opinions. More than one writer had suspected 

 those animals had them, and that they themselves had seen 

 something like them ; for a proof of which the reader need 

 look no farther than Dr. Hatter's ' Elem. Phys.' 1 But as those 

 writers had given no proofs of their having discovered them, 

 their suspicions and opinions passed for nothing. 



Professor Monro, not satisfied with claiming these discoveries, 

 has even gone farther ; he has intimated in some parts of his 

 book that I might have learnt them, or a part of them, from 

 him. As in p. 4, where he speaks of " my giving an account 

 of these vessels entirely as my own discovery " this in p. 6 he 

 calls " broaching another subject with him " and complains of 

 me " for passing in silence what I might have heard him ob- 

 serve concerning it when I attended his lectures." How Pro- 

 fessor Monro could pretend that I had learnt anything from 

 him on this subject, that ought not for his sake to be passed 

 in silence, is astonishing. What could I learn from one who 

 has repeatedly since that time acknowledged he never saw these 

 vessels; that they might be too short to become visible; and 

 who, at the time I attended his lectures, said he could not 

 find them, as I have already declared. But as my testimony 

 will have more weight with the reader, when corroborated with 

 that of a gentleman unconcerned in the dispute, I shall next 

 add a copy of some notes taken by Dr. Morgan, now professor 

 of medicine in Philadelphia, who attended Dr. Monroes lectures 

 at the same time with myself, and who, at my request, sent 

 me the following excerpt, taken at his lecture upon the ques- 

 tion, Whether the common veins absorb or not ? 



" Most authors (says Dr. Monro) concurring in opinion that 

 fowls were destitute of lymphatics, and not being able to dis- 

 cover them myself, I was led to be of their opinion. I 

 have already observed, that where conglobate glands are found, 

 there are lymphatics, and the converse of this proposition, 

 namely, where there is no conglobate gland, there are no 

 lymphatics. And there being no conglobate glands to be seen 



1 Lib. ii, sect, iii ; lib. xxiv, sect. 2. 



