[ 500 ] 
"what refpedt, then, do Fungi differ from all other 
plants, as to the timilarity in all the parts, &c. ? 
Laifly, when our author afferts, That every Fungus 
is contained in an entire and perfed date from the be- 
ginning, in the egg, or, as it is called, the feed, and 
wants nothing but evolution, in order to imbibe the 
neceffary juices; when our author afferts this, he af- 
ferts nothing but what will be readily granted by every 
one, who has read the obfervations made by modern 
philofophers, on this part of nature, and the only 
difference between him and others is, that he con- 
fines himfelf to one order of plants, what they ima- 
gine, from good reafon, to be the cafe of all ; and 
this feems likewife to be the cafe throughout the ani- 
mal creation, with this difference only, that, in fome 
animals, fome parts fall off entirely, after a certain 
time, and a new form enfues ; yet even here, all the 
forms preceding the laft may, and perhaps ought, as 
has been obferved by Linnaeus, to be looked upon as 
embryo dates. 
Upon the whole, I think our author feems inclined 
to invent a new hypothefis, from a few infufficient 
data, rather than to be forced into it by any leading 
phenomena, which ought to be very ftrong and con- 
vincing, to make us give up an analogy, that is con- 
fined within fuch moderate bounds. However, this 
ought not to prejudice us in relation to the latter part 
of this work ; on the contrary, it ought to give us a 
favourable opinion of him, as it fhews his zeal and 
application to this part of natural hiftory. A man 
may be an excellent and ufeful obferver, and yet be a 
•very indifferent natural philofopher. 
I come 
