VOL. XXII.] PHILOSOPHICAL TRANSACTIONS. 551 



But, without disputing it as a point in divinity, whether men before the 

 flood, did or might feed on flesh, supposing it to be wholesome nourishment^ 

 the Doctor considers it, with Gassendus, as a question in natural philosophy, 

 whether it be proper food for man. 



The consideration insisted on by Gassendus, is from the structure of the 

 teeth, being mostly either incisores, or molares ; not such as, in carnivorous 

 animals, are proper to tear flesh, except only 4, which are called canini ; as if 

 nature had rather furnished our teeth for cutting herbs, roots, &c. and for 

 bruising grain, nuts, and other hard fruits, than for tearing flesh, as carnivorous 

 animals do with their claws and sharp teeth. And even when we feed on flesh 

 it is not without a preparative coction, by boiling, roasting, baking, &c. And 

 even so we forbid it to persons in a fever, or other like distempers, as of too 

 hard digestion. And children, before their palates are vitiated by custom, are 

 more fond of fruits than of flesh-meat. And their breeding worms is wont to 

 be imputed to their too early feeding on flesh. 



This ingenious conjecture of Gassendus presently suggested to the Doctor 

 another speculation, which seems not less considerable, viz. There is in swine, 

 sheep, oxen, and in most quadrupeds that feed on herbs or plants, a long colon, 

 with a caecum at the upper end of it, or somewhat equivalent, which conveys 

 the food by a long and large progress from the stomach downwards, in order to 

 a slower passage and longer stay in the intestines ; but in dogs of several kinds 

 and probably in foxes, wolves, and divers other animals which are carnivorous, 

 such colon is wanting ; and, instead of it, is a more short and slender gut, and 

 a quicker passage through the intestines. 



What the Doctor would propose hereupon is, to consider whether it gene- 

 rally holds, or how far, that animals which are not carnivorous have such a 

 colon, or somewhat equivalent ; and, that those which are carnivorous have it 

 not. For if so, it seems to be a great indication that nature, which may be 

 reasonably presumed to adapt tie intestines to the different sorts of aliments 

 that are to pass through them, accordingly informs us to what animals flesh is 

 proper aliment, and to what it is not; and that from thence we may judge more 

 solidly than from the structure of the teeth onlj, whether or not flesh was de- 

 signed is proper food for man. 



Now it is well known, that in man, and propably in the ape, monkey, baboon, 

 &c. such colon is very remarkable. It is true, that the caecum in man is very 

 small, and seems to be of little or no use : but in a foetus it is in proportion 

 much larger than in adults ; and it is possible that our customary change of diet, 

 as we grow up, from what originally would be more natural, may occasion its 

 shrinking into this contracted posture. But the Doctor adds also, that man's 



