[ 5+5 3 
whole Eye, when view'd in a Microfcope, appears 
exactly like a Honeycomb : Now, as the Eyes com- 
pos'd of thefe hexagonal Lens’s , are in full View to 
the other Bees, does it not feem that Providence 
has directed them fo as to be a Pattern fet before 
them, for the Bees to follow informing their Combs? 
Is it not alfo reafonable to believe, from the Difpro- 
portion of the Convexity betwixt the three fmooth 
tranfparent Eyes, and the Lens’s of the dark rough 
Eyes, that they are appointed for different Purpofes? 
why may it not be thought that the Lens’s are great 
Magnifiers, to view things nigh at hand, and by many 
Reflexions to convey Light into the dark Hives, 
where Light is (till necefiary $ and that the three 
other Eyes are to obferve Obje&s at a great Diftance, 
fo as to conduit them abroad to Fields at a Diftance, 
and back again to their Hives? 
I agree with M. Reaumur in the Form and Ufe 
of the Fang or Tromp of the working Bee, and of 
the Ufe of the Mouth within the Teeth of the Bee; 
fo that it does not fuck, but laps or licks with its 
rough Fang or Tromp, like a Dog. But 1 have ne- 
ver obferved the Bee nipping or breaking open the 
Apices of Flowers, to let out the Farina , when it is 
not fully blown or open ; but have often with 
Pleafure obferved the Bee gathering the Farina upon 
its Fang, by licking it off the Apices , and laying it 
upon the firft Pair of Legs, which convey it to the 
fecond Pair, and thefe lodge it upon the Pallet of 
the third Pair, with furprifing Brisknefs ; fo that, 
by the time the fecond Pair has lodg'd it upon the 
third Pair, the Bee has gather’d more, and lodg’d it 
on the fore Legs j fo that all are in conftant Motion. 
From 
