( 5II7 ) 
Alfo,the youDgeft and tendrcft of them^ that hdh as am 
moft Juicy, to have been very much eaten by the Grey mea- 
dow na^edsmil^ lodgmg themfelves withio the fides of the 
plant. 
Concerning this kiodof biting Muflirom> I gad ia a cer- 
tain late difcourfe of the 6"^^/^ of ^z^^^j thefe words ; ^roo^ 
(htdys Fungorum maximij paltnam lati^ infiar Oma/i bibulifunt^ 
crajjl ^ candidijdum crudi (unt^ fucco ( laBeo futh) abundant. 
Eos f cut: Ttthyma.llum muriSt corrigunt Rutheni ^ aliier fauces 
^ guttur inflammahunt^ Ipfe femel nimis 'inconftderate ajpitos 
comedere tmtaham^ non fne fujfQcattonis pericuh^ThQ reference 
CO the Cuts or Figures is here confufed^ and the defcription 
too concifejj to fay that Ours agrees in any thing with 
Theirs , fave the great acrimony of the Juice they both 
yield. . 
I may fonaetime acquaint you v^^ith the Medicinal Ufes^ 
I have caufed to be najde oi this White Re fin : In the meao 
time 1 (hall only mind you of the great affinity it hath with 
, Euphorbium. 
Since this Letter the Author thereof was pleafed to give u§ 
this further Account in an other of Decemb. ij^ vi^. 
Mr fFr^yreturn'd me this Anfwer to my Letter 
about the biting Mushrom j 
^*Atmyreturn loMidletonl found a Letter from you, 
containing the Defcription of a Muflirom by you difco- 
**ver'd in M^r^o«- woods under Pinno moor. I doubt not 
but it is that defcribed in Joh^ Bauhinl. 40. c, 6. under the 
title of Fungm piperatus albus^ laBeofucco turgens^ Only he 
" laith ; i. That it doth in bignefs exceed the Champignon ^ 
^'^^ whereas you writCj that there are few of them much big- 
ger than that / But yet in faying fo, you grant them to be 
*^ bigger* 24He faith, for their bignefs they are not fo thick 
as that'^yon defcribe yours to be thick in flefb. In all other 
points the Dcfcriptions agree exadly. For the^'o/w^that 
O o o o o 2 it 
