
Of their Sex, Brae nn 7% 
I therefore leave the readers to judge whether thefe 
authors, aware of this abfurdity, and apprehenfive of the 
unhappy confequences, did rot out of defign wave that 
title; or for fome other reafon. , But to proceed. 
. May we not alfo argue againft this notion from the 
prodigious number of Drones ? if one fingle Bee, (fuppofe 
a female) be fufficient to produce ten or twelve thoufand 
in one fummer, what occafion can there be, or neceffi- 
ty, for many hundreds, nay fome times thoufands (as in 
ftrong flocks or colonies to my knowledge) to copulate 
with one female ; reafon and common fenfe will tell us 
a much lefs number mutt be fufficient and effeQtual for 
fuch a purpofe. Why fhould fuch numbers of thefe be 
produced for the fake of one Queen, when few would be 
{ufficient? 
We find it fo among the fowls, which we obferve in 
pairs ; one male, and one female; and among the beafts 
of the field, we frequently fee one male impowered to 
ferve an. entire herd or flock; why may it not be the 
fame among infects? _ 
_ I very well remember the Croydon phyfician quarrels 
with king Charles’s Bee-mafter for making a bull of his 
king.* Thus he writes; a Bee is firft an egg, and not 
as Mr. Rufden ignorantly fuppofes, made of animable 
matter (where he greatly miftakes the apothecary, and 
wrongs him,) gathered by the Bees from flowers, and 
_ caft into the combs as their proper matrix; then he 
makes a King-Bee, and prefently makes a town-bull of 
his king, going from cell to cell, and cafting his feed ine 
) E4 | to 
® Dr, Warder, p. 12s nthe 
