ao OF MULES. 



be colleded. But men were wrong in afferting 

 that mules were ablblutely barren, and that ali 

 animals proceeding from a mixture of different 

 fpecies were, like the mules, incapable of pro- 

 ducing. The fads formerly related concerning 

 the produce of a he-goat and a ewe, ot a dog and 

 a fhe-wolf, an(| of Canary birds and goldfinches, 

 demonflrate, that thefe mongrels are by no means 

 barren, and that fome of them are equally pro- 

 lific with their parents. 



It is an unhappy circqmftancc, that a fmall, 

 and often nominal error, extends over every ob- 

 je£t to which it has any relation, and at lall not 

 only becomes an error in fad, but gives rife ta 

 a general prejudice, that is more difficult to re- 

 move than rhe particular opinion from which it 

 originated. A fmgle word, a name like that of 

 viult\ wiiich ought folely to reprefent the idea 

 of the animal proceeding from the afs and 

 mare, has been improperly applied to the ani- 

 mal produced by the horfe and the fhe-afs, and 

 afterward, with ftill greater impropriety, to alj 

 quadrupeds, ar>d all birds, of mixed fpecies: And, 



as 



duced, to wliich he gave the anCvers f>ibjo;ned to each query, 

 and figned thei-n, as did James Small and Robert Ramfay, at- 

 tefting the truth tliereof, in prefence of 



GEORGE WATSON, J. F;. 



The original atteftation is in the poflcffion of the Tranfla- 

 tor ; and he lately tranfmitted notorial or authenticated copies 

 Of it to the Count de Luffon, and to Thomas Tennant, Efq; 

 «i PowjiinT, in Flintfuir-J. 



