TO THE

REA DE R.

S the Noble Founder of the LECTURES I have had the Honour of Preaching, was a great Improver of Natural Knowledge, fo, in all Probability, he did it out of a pious End, as well as in Purfuit of his Genius. For it was his fettled Opinion, that nothing tended more to cultivate true Religion and Piety in a Man's Mind, than a thorough Skill in Philofophy. And fuch Effect it manifeftly had in him, as is evident from divers of his published Pieces from his conftant Deportment in never mentioning the Name of GOD without a Pause, and visible Stop in his

Vid. Bishop BURNET's Funeral Sermon, P. 24.

Difcourfe; and from the noble Foundation of bis Lectures for the Honour of GOD, and the generous Stipend be allowed for the fame.

A 4

And

Will.

And forafmuch as his Lectures were appointed by him for the Proof of the Vid. Mr. BOYLE's Chriftian Religion against Atheifts and other notorious Infidels, I thought, when I had the Honour to be made his Lecturer, that I could not better come up to his Intent, than to attempt a Demonftration of the Being and Attributes of Go D, in what I may call Mr. Boyle's own, that is, a Phyfico-Theological Way. And, befides that, as it was for this very Service that I was called to this Honour, I was the more induced to follow this Method, by reafon none of my learned and ingenious Predeceffors in thefe Lectures have done it on purpose, but only cafually, in a tranfient, piece-meal Manner; they having made it their Bufinefs to prove the great Points of Chriftianity in another Way, which they have accordingly admirably done. But confidering what our Honourable Founder's Opinion was of Natural Knowledge, and that his Intent was, that thofe Matters, by paffing through divers Hands, and by being treated of in different Methods, fhould take in most of what could be faid upon the Subject; I hope my Performance may be acceptable, although one of the meanest.

As for others, who have before me done fomething of this kind, as Merfenne on Genefis; Dr. Cockburne in his Effays; Mr. Ray in bis Wisdom of GOD, &c. and I may add the firft of Mr. Boyle's Lecturers, the most learned Dr. Bentley, in his Boyle's Lectures, the eloquent Archbishop of Cambray (and, 1 bear, the inge

nious

;

nious Monfieur Perault bath fomething of this Kind, but never faw it) I fay, as to these learned and ingenious Authors, as the Creation is an ample Subject, fo I industriously endeavoured to avoid doing over again what they before had done and for that Reafon did not, for many Years, read their Books, until I had finished my own. But when I came to compare what each of us had done, I found myself in many Things to have been anticipated by fome or other of them, efpecially by my Friend, the late Great Mr. Ray. And therefore in fome Places I fhorten'd my Difcourfe, and referr'd to them; and in a few others, where the Thread of my Difcourfe would have been interrupted, I have made ufe of their Authority, as the best Judges; as of Mr. Ray's for Inftance, with relation to the Mountains, and their Plants, and other Projects. If then the Reader fhould meet with any thing mentioned before by others, and not accordingly acknowledged by me, I hope he will candidly think me no Plagiary, because I can affure him I have all along (where I was aware of it) cited my Authors with their due Praife. And it is fcarce poffible, when Men write on the fame, or a Subject near a-kin, and the Obfervations are obvious, but that they must often hit upon the fame Thing: And frequently this may happen from Perfons making Obfervations about one and the fame Thing, without knowing what each other bath done; which indeed, when the first Edition of my Book was nearly printed off, I found to be my own Cafe, having (for want of Dr. Hook's

Micro

Micrography being at hand, it being a very Scarce Book, and many Years fince I read it) giving Defcriptions of two or three Things, which I thought had not been tolerably well obferved before, but are defcribed well by that curious Gentleman.

One is a Feather, the Mechanifm of which we in the main agree in, except in his Reprefentation in Fig. 1. Scheme 22. which is fomewhat different from what I have reprefented in Fig. 18. &c. But I can ftand by the Truth, though not the Elegance of my Figures. But as to the other Differences, they are accidental, occafion'd by our taking the Parts in a different View, or in a different Part of a Vane; and to fay the Truth, (not flattering myself, or detracting from the admirable Obfervations of that Great Man) I have hit upon a few Things that escap'd him, being enabled to do fo, not only by the Help of fuch Microfcopes as be made ufe of; but also by thofe made by Mr. Wilfon, which exceed all I ever Jaw, whether of English, Dutch, Italian Make; feveral of which Sorts I have feen and examined.

The other Thing we have both of us figured and defcribed, is, The Sting of a Bee or Wasp; in which we differ more than in the laft. But by a careful Re-examination, I find, that although Dr. Hook's Obfervations are more critical than any where before, yet they are not fo true as mine. For as to the Scabbard (as be calls it) I could never difcover any Beards thereon; and I dare be confident there are none,

I

but

but what are on the two Spears. And as to the Point of the Scabbard, he hath reprefented it as tubular, or bluntish at the Top; but it really terminates in a sharp Point, and the two Spears and the Poifon come out of a Slit, or longifh Hole, a little below the Top or Point. And as to the Spears, he makes them to be but one, and that the Point thereof lies always out of the Scabbard. But by a frict Examination, they will be found to be two, as I have faid, and that they always lie within the Scabbard, except in Stinging; as I have reprefented them, in Fig. 21. from the transparent Sting of a Wafp. And as to the Spear being made of the Joints, and parted into two, as his Fig. 2. Scheme 16. reprefents, I could never upon a Review, difcover it to be fo, but imagine, that by feeing the Beards lying upon, or behind the Spears, he might take them for Joints, and by feeing the Point of one Spear lie before the other, he might think the Spear was parted in two. But left the Reader Should think himself impofed upon by Dr. Hook, and my Self, it is necessary to be obferved, that the Beards (or Tenterhooks, as Dr. Hook calls them) lie only on one Side of each Spear, not all round them; and are therefore not to be feen, unless they are laid in a due Pofture in the Microscope; viz. fide ways, not under, or a top the Spear.

The laft Thing (which jcarce deferves mention) is the Mechanism of the Hair, which Dr. Hook found to be folid, like a long Piece of Horn, not hollow, as Malpighi found it in fome Animals.

And