( H ) 
Motize is what the Portugueze call jddams Fig Tree, becaufe of the 
Largcnels of its Leaves. 
It is no Wonder that this Account Larded Dr. Rohinfon, and 
that, having nothing but Alpinus and his own O bier various on 
the dry’d Coffee Fruit to be guided by, he was at a Lois what to 
make of it. ‘ M. Bernier^ who pafs d the Red Sea into Arabia , 
(fays the Dodlor to Mr. Ray, in a Letter publifli’d not long ago 
by Mr. Verhani) ‘ doth affirm. That the Arabs afl'urcd him that 
^ the Coffee Fruit was fown every Year, under Trees, upon which 
^ it did climb and run. From which he concludes it to be a 
^ Species of Conuohulus . I think he might as well have con- . 
^ eluded it to be a Phafeohs^ or fome other fcandent Legume— ^ — 
^ If M. Bernier was truly inform’d of its annual lowing and climb- 
^ ing, then Alpinus never faw the true Coffee Plant I have ex- 
‘ amin’d many Coffee Berries, as they call them, here in London, 
and am almoft perfuaded by my own Obfervation that they are 
^ neither Berries nor the Seeds of any Conijohuhis, nor of any 
t Legume, but are rather of the Nut Kind. 
. Bu Fours Treatife of Coffee was printed in 1(^85, and in the 
Beo;innins thereof he terms the Coffee a Legrume, or kind of fo- 
reign Bean 5 but when he talks of the Plant it felf^ he is not al- 
together againft its being called a Tree, tho’ he inclines more to 
rank it among the Shrubs. ‘ The Tree that produces the Coffee 
(fays he) ^ is like the Euonymus or Spindle Tree {Fufain in French) 
*■ which bears the Seed we call Bonnet de Pretre, as we are inform’d 
^ by Alpinus, who faw it in his Travels. In the Memoirs which 
^ I have received from the Levant, it is compared to our middling 
Sort of Cherry Trees, both in Leaves, Branches and Size, for 
^ at moff it is but a Shrub. 
Blegny compares the Trunk of the Coffee Plant to a common 
Bean Stalk. What led him into this Miflake was his looking; on 
the Branch delineated by Alpinus^ to be the whole Plant. 
As J)u Fours Book was the latefl, and, as Mr. Ray owns, the 
befl that he had heard of about Coffee, when the fecond Tome 
of his Hijlory of Plants came out, we need not be furpriz’d to 
find that he imitates him in calling it a Shrub. 
In this, and in nothing elfe, he is followed by the Worthy 
and Learned Sir Flans Sloan, whofe Account of this Plant, pub- 
lifli’d in the Philof TranfaB. N° 208, is by far the moff exad that 
had till then appear’d. 
Mr. Dale, in his Pharmacologia^ 1710, ventures to diffent from 
Mr. Ray in this Particular, and calls the Coffee Plant a Tree. This 
was certainly not the Effedf of any Knowledge he had of the 
2 Plant-, 
