[ 399 ] 
That the Belemnites are not Teeth or Horns of 
Fifth, l (hall refer you to the Letter your late learned 
Member Dr. John Woodward wrote on that Subject 
to Mr. Bourguet, of Switzerland , wherein he fully 
proves the Erroneoufhefs of thofe Opinions. But a 
further Argument again ft their being Teeth, which 
that learned ISJaturalift has not touch'd upon, is, that 
no Belemnites have that natural Varnifh or Polifli, 
which always covers the Teeth of all Animals ; 
whereas the greateft Part of thofe foil'll Bodies, 
which we know to be fuch, as the Bufcmit £ , Glop 
Jopetra , &c. are found with that lame Varnilh 
or Polifh. As for their owing their Form to 
being moulded in Shells, it will appear contradict 
tory to Reafon, when we confider, i 9 . Their Cotm 
ftitution to be ever as regular as their Figure ; and, 
2°. That their inner Layer or Nucleus is as equally 
regular as the outer Cruft or whole Body j which 
Particular could never have happen'd, had they been 
moulded in Shells j as is evident, by the Tur binit ce 3 
Qonchitre , and other Bodies, which owe their Fi- 
gures to that Caufe. That the Belemnites are not 
Spines of Echini , let us firft confider, that no Kinds 
hitherto di (cover'd have been ever found to have 
Spines analogous to thefe Bodies; nor indeed has 
any marine Shell whatever fuch a Texture. The 
immediate Subterfuge for an Anfwer to this Objec- 
tion is, that the Kinds of Shells unknown to Mam 
kind are far more in Number than thofe yet diico-r 
ver’d. I allow it; but think that cannot be an Ar- 
gument in the prelent Cafe, fince no one fingle 
Species is yet difcovcPd with fuch, nor even any 
Genus, which have Spines analogous to the Belem - 
F f f nites. 
