opinions which have arifen amongft philofophical en¬ 
quirers, relative to their real nature, and the rank 
which they lhould hold in the fcalc of beings. Many 
of the fpecies of this clafs have, by the ancient wri¬ 
ters and feveral of the moderns likewife, been deferi- 
bed as vegetables; but from the unwearied attention 
of fomc learned naturalifts to this fubjecl, it was at 
length difeovered, and feems now pretty generally ad¬ 
mitted, that they arc in reality of an animal nature, 
and that the ftrong refcmblance which many of them 
bear to vegetables, is to be conlidered as entirely ow¬ 
ing to the operation of the animals which formed them. 
In a publication of this nature, it will not be ex¬ 
pended, that a particular inveitigation of the arguments 
on both fides of this curious fubjecl lliould be intro¬ 
duced : we {hall therefore refer fuch of our readers 
who may wifh for more circumfhmtial deferiptions, to 
the Philofophical Tranfadions, the Memoirs of the 
French Academy ; and more particularly to the works 
of the late Mr. Ellis, where the fulled information may 
be found. 
The whole tribe of the marine fubftances, known by 
the general names of Corals and Corallines, (with fome 
animals of a different kind,) are arranged in the Lin- 
naean Syftem under two diviiions, viz. Lithophyta and 
Zoophyta. In the latter of thefe, or Zoophytes, the 
animal nature predominates more apparently than in 
the former; and indeed thefe beings (as the name im¬ 
ports) feem rather to be a compofitioil of animal and 
vegetable; whereas in the Lithophytes, or other Lm- 
naean divilion, the ftony or calcareous part predonu- 
nates 
