Of their Sex, &c. oR 
I therefore leave the readers to judge whether thefe 
authors, aware of this abfurdity, and apprehenfive of the 
uahappy confequences, did rot out of defign wave that 
title; or for fome other reafon. But to proceed. 
May we not a!fo argue againft this notion from the 
prodigious number of Drones ? if one fingle Bee, (fuppofe 
a female) be fufficient to produce ten or twelve thoufand 
in one fummer, what occafion can there be, or neceffi- 
ty, for many hundreds, nay fome times thoufands (as in 
{trong flocks or colonies to my knowledge) to copulate 
with one female ; reafon and common fenfe will tell us 
a much lefs number muft be fufficient and effectual for 
fuch a purpofe. Why fhould fuch numbers of thefe be 
produced for the fake of one Queen, when few would be 
fufficient? 
_ We find it fo among the fowls, which we obferve in 
pairs ; one male, and one female ; and among the beafts 
of the field, we frequently fee one male impowered to 
ferve an entire herd or flock; why may it not be the 
fame among infects ? : 
_ I very well remember the Croydon phyfician quarrels 
' with king Charls’s Bee- mafter for making a bull of his 
king.* ‘Thus he writes; a Bee is firft an egg, and not 
as Mr. Rufden jignorantly fuppofes, made of animable 
matter (where he greatly miftakes the apothecary, and 
_ wrongs him,) gathered by the Bees from flowers, and 
caft into the combs as their proper matrix; then he 
makes a King-Bee, and prefently makes a town-bull of 
his king, going from cell to cell, and cafting his feed ine 
sgh ty to 
® Dr, Warder, p. 124 
