[ 320 ] 
occafioned by accidents of any kind during pregnancy ; 
but probably has its exiftence always originating, caujd 
adhuc incognita^ in the firft ftamina of the embryo (O ? 
Thus, SIR, I have faithfully related the particulars of 
this lingular phsenomenon among the human fpecies,. 
which, to a demonftration, confirms y^our opinion, that 
the nourifhment of the foetus in ute'ro is principally by 
means of t\\t funis umbilicalis. M. merry obferves, that 
defe6Uve monfters are more inftru6i:ive than others that 
have redundancies If this be true, here is hill an 
ample field for fpeculation, notwithflanding the few very 
obvious remarks which I have already ventured to make. 
In conformity to the general language of authors, I have 
ill this efTay occafionally adopted the ufe of the term 
monfier. There is, however, fomething in that word ex- 
tremely repugnant to our common feelings, and very apt 
to leave a terrifying impreflion upon the mind. Why 
may not the Author of Being fometimes produce varia- 
tions in the human fpecies, as well as in the animal and 
vegetable kingdoms and equally exempt too from 
fuch frightful appellations? Would it not, therefore, 
be more eligible in the prefent infta.nce, and every fimi- 
lar one, to explode, the common term, and call it limply 
(i) The great baron hAller is of opinion alfo, that this, is evidently the 
cafe in that fpecies of monfters to which parts are added. Vide Opera Minora 
HALLERI, tom. III. p. 148. 
(k) L’ Academic des Sciences, Hift. 1720, p. 13. 
[l) Seep. LicETUs. j. palfyn des Monftres, &c. in which are many inr 
fiances of each kincL 
a lufus 
