DIFFERENT SYSTEMS. 145 



' in the hiftory of the Academy of Sciences, 

 ann. 1701, fome obje£lions are propofed by M. 

 Mery againft the egg-fyftern. This able anato- 

 mill maintained, with propriety, that the veficles 

 found in the tefticles of females are not eggs ; 

 that they adhere fo firmly to the internal fur- 

 face of the teflicle, as nof to admit of a natural 

 feparation ; and that, though they could feparate 

 from the fubftance of the tefticle, it was impof- 

 fible for them to get out of it, becaufe the tex- 

 ture of the common membrane inclofing the 

 whole tefticle is fo firm and ftrong, that it is im- 

 pradicable to conceive the pollibility of its being 

 pierced by a veficle, or round foft egg. And, 

 as moft anatomifts and phyficians were prepof- 

 fcfted in favour of the egg-fyftem, and imagined 

 that the number of cicatrices in the tefticles cor- 

 refponded with the number of foetufes, M. Mery 

 fliowed ibch a quantity of thefe cicatrices in the 

 tefticles of a v/oman, as, upon the fuppofition 

 of the truth of this fyftem, w^ould have argued 

 a fecundity beyond the power of credibility. 

 Thefe difficulties ftimulated other anatomifts of 

 the Academy, who were partizans of the eggs, 

 to make new refearches. M. Duverney ex- 

 amined the tefticles of cows and fheep, and 

 maintained, that the veficles were eggs, becaufe 

 fome of them adhered id's firmly to the tefticles 

 than others ; and that it was natural to fuppofe 

 they feparated altogether when they arrived 

 at full maturity ; efpccially as, by blowing into 

 Vol. II. K ' the 



