Part II. i?t thz Creation. 227 



II. The Body of Man may thence be proved to 

 be the Effedt of Wifdom, becaufe there is nothing 

 in it deficient, nothing fuperfluous, nothing but 

 hath its Ei)d and Ufe. So true are thofe Maxims 

 we have ah"eady made ufe of ; Natura nihil fa cit 

 Jriiftra, and Natura non abundat infiiperjhiis^ nee 

 deficit in necejfariii^ no Part that we can well 

 fpare. T^he Eye cannot fay to the Handy I have 

 710 need of thee ; nor the Head to the Feet^ I have 

 no need of you, i Cor. xii. 21. that I may ufurp 

 the Apodle's Simihtude. 



The Belly cannot* quarrel with the Members, 

 nor they with the Belly for her feeming Sloth ; 

 as they provide for Meat for her, fo fhe concodts 

 and diftributes it to them ; only it may be doubt- 

 ed to what Ufe the Paps in Men (hould ferve. I 

 anfwer, partly for Ornament, partly for a kind 

 of Conformity between the Sexes, and partly to 

 defend and cherifh the Heart ; in fome they con- 

 tain Milk, as in a Danijh Family we read of in 

 Bartholines Anatotnical Obfervatiom ; however, it 

 follpws not that they or any other Parts of the 

 Body are ufclefs becaufe we are ignorant. 



I have lately met with a Story in Signior Paulo 

 Boccones natural Obfervaiions, printed at Bologna 

 in Italy 1684, well attefted, concerning a Coun- 

 tryman call'd Billardirio di Billo, living in a Vil- 

 lage belonging to the City of Nocera in Umb7^iay 

 call'd Scwareggio, whofe Wife dying, and leaving 

 a young Infant, he nouriih.'d it with his own 

 Milk. This Man,, citfer becaufe in the fmall 



Q^jj Village 



