THAT Doctor Leigh may be ſatisfied I am the very ſame Man I ever took my ſelf to be, I have, by Certificates from the Perſons who carried my Sheets to Dr. Goodall's Houſe (from the Place where I have lodged ever ſince I came to London) proved, that Dr. Goodall did correct and approve of my Book; and that he was concerned in it, appears from his Letter ſent to me at Oxford: And how diſingenuouſly and diſhonourably the Doctor hath dealt with me, let the World judge.

But of this I have ſaid enough before; I ſhall therefore take a View of what the Doctor hath ſaid, either againſt me, or in Defence of himſelf; in doing which, I ſhall only lay down Matter of Fact, and leave the World to judge whether I have given him his Anſwer.

And Firſt in his Title, he calls my laſt Book, my Laſt Piece; he calls my Book of the Heat of the Blood, a Piece; ſo that all I can write in the Language of the Famous Doctor Doctorum Doctor Leigh muſt needs be Pieces: But I leave it to the World to judge, whether what he writes, be not more like Pieces than Books; for in the firſt Place he writ a Penny Book againſt me; next he writ a Three penny Book againſt Mr. Colbatch; and now I have got a Two-penny Book again: So that I cannot for the Heart of me, ſtretch the Doctors Phancy, to write a Book as valuable as a common Almanack; and it's ſtrange that all the Doctor can ſay againſt me is not worth more than Two pence in his own Opinion; but perhaps he hath ſqueezed more Senſe into his Pieces than uſually ſticks in ſo ſmall a Compaſs, and therefore I ſhall examin their Merit.

In his firſt Piece he hath made Remarks on Pigs, Mice, Elephants, Cheeſmongers, Iriſh-Men, C—w T—d. The Pudenda of a Salt Bitch, Duck-Shot, Roger a Coverly, the Wiſe Men of Gotham, the Cuckow and Diego and his Spaniſh Geeſe. And all theſe wonderful Phaenomena hath he declaimed on, inſtead of Anſwering me: But truly in his laſt Piece, he hath condemned himſelf. And Page the 12th ſays, They were writ in a Stile too light for the Gravity and Sobriety of Philoſophy; ſo that in this, we muſt expect ſomething like a Philoſopher; truly a happy Change: And I hope my laſt Preſcription hath taken effect. But let us ſee what Alterations it hath wrought. Page 5th, he makes his Obſervations on Sportive Rattles of unthinking Striplings: Page 6th, He ſays, a Snail will make a ſwift New-Market Courſer; which may be true, if a Horſes Name. Page 7th, he hath coined a New Metaphor, viz. Faeculent Brain, derived from Bog-houſe, in his firſt Piece, Page 7th. But Page 8th, He ſays, if the Lapwing would ſtay till the Shell dropt off his Head, he might fly: Page 9th. He ſays, The Crane and the P • gmies might have fought about the Knots in a Bull-ruſh • . 10th. He tells us a Story of a Tartar that defaces th • Plains he was foraging in, and ſtraight removes to a 〈◊〉 Clime: Whence it's evident that his Notions of Feve •• and Inflammatory Diſeaſes, could not be borrowed from Dr. Willis. A ſtrange Conſequence. p. 14th. he ſays, The Weaſh-man purchaſed the Pompion for the Mare's Egg and got never a Colt from it, and theſe are things not too light for the gravity and ſobriety of Philoſophy. Strange! how the Dr. Philoſophized when he wrote theſe things of Weight and Sobriety, and how much they differ from the admirable Contents of his firſt Peice.

But if this be the Dr's Philoſophy, unenvied by me may he phyloſophize, till he hath gathered enough to compleat his Theory; I for my Part ſhall leave him to hug and admire his Peices till he is weary; and ſhall only take notice of what he further dogmatically denies in my Book without giving any Reaſon for it, and what he ſays for himſelf.

And Firſt, all that ſticks with the Doctor, as to my Books, is, That he cannot See or Taſte the Mucilage; which I conceive to be Animal Spirits; and that the Metaphorical Glands which are made up of the Extremities of the Veſſels, cannot be diſcerned by Microſcopes: This is all that the Doctor alledges againſt my Books, the remaining part of his Sheet being either Enlargements upon the wonderful Stock of Philoſophy, but juſt now mentioned, or a Vindication of his own Book.

As to the Firſt, he tells me, I no where prove Animal Spirits to be an Oyly Mucilage; and he asks me, Whether I ever ſaw it or taſted it? To this I anſwer, that I have both ſeen and taſted it; and have already proved the Animal Spirits to be an Oyly Mucilage, in my Book of the Heat of the Blood; and therefore, I ſhall refer the Reader thither, it not being requiſite that I ſhould trouble my ſelf to repeat what is there ſaid, as often as Dr. Leigh ſhall ask the Queſtion afreſh.

And ſince he here ſays, Their Agility in Voluntary Motion, demonſtrates that they do not move ſlower than Blood; I anſwer, That it is no Demonſtration; for though the Spirits move ſlowly in the Nerves, yet when they come to be mixed with the Blood, and meet with Particles which are of a different Temper and Texture, they may then become Active, and many degrees more active than before. So the Particles of Alkalies and Acids when kept ſeparate in diſtinct Veſſels, have not half the Agility and Activity in their Parts, as when mixed together; the Reſult of their Mixture, if Volatile, being a ſtrong Fermentation, which was in neither of the ſeparate Liquors, And altho' Gun-powder be ſlowly ſqueezed through a long pipe and out of that falls upon the Fire, yet it's Exploſion when worked upon by ſo powerful an Agent, is no argument that the Corpuſcles of the Gun-powder were in as violent a Motion before the Exploſion; ſince it's evident that they are not; ſo that the Spirits may move ſlowly in the Nerves when kept ſeparate from the Blood, yet be put into a more violent Agitation when mixed with it; that Agitation being no Argument of their equal Agility before, but a conſequence of their Mixture.

But to proceed to his other Objection, viz. That the Metapborical Glands cannot be ſeen with a Microſcope; To this I anſwer, that by Metaphorical Glands, I mean nothing but a Commixture of the Extremities of Veſſels, Metaphorical Glands implying no more; which appears from what I have ſaid in my Book of Muſcular Motion, to which I ſhall refer the Reader, it not being neceſſary to repeat what is there, tho' Dr. Leigh ſhould for Information ſake, ask the Queſtion again and again: But that what I have ſaid there, is ſufficient to prove, that there are ſuch Glands, I preſume undeniable, till what I have offered with ſubmiſſion to Reaſon, be confuted by it; and then if I cannot maintain it, let it fall: It is Knowledge and Truth I ſhall ever value above my own Opinion, if it be not ſo; but if it be, I ſhall value it as Truth, and only content my ſelf with the ſatisfaction of contributing my Endeavours to the General ſtock of Knowledge. But to ſatisfy the World, that we are not to diſ-believe, what I have ſaid of thoſe Glands, becauſe we cannot ſee them, I ſhall add a Quotation from the Honourable Eſquire Boyle's Works, which will ſhew him, that there are ſeveral Truths in Nature, which we believe, becauſe we have Reaſon for it; tho' as to Sight they are imperceivable; for that moſt ingenious and experimental Promoter of uſeful Knowledge, who was a profound, and one of the greateſt of Philoſophers, in his Hiſtory of Fludity, Page 189. Sect. XX. admits of Reaſon to be proof, where the minuteneſs of Bodies renders them imperceivable: For he ſays, If it be objected, that the Various and Inſenſible Parts of Water, and reſembling Bodies, wherein we make the Nature of Fluidity chiefly to conſiſt, is but an Imaginary thing, and but precariouſly aſſerted, ſince by our own Confeſſion they are ſo ſmall, that the Particles themſelves, and more, the diverſity of their Motions, are imperceptable by Senſe, &c. We ſhall not deny the Objection to be plauſible, but muſt not acknowledge it to be unanſwerable. And the like may be ſaid for thoſe Glands; for if we have Reaſon to believe there are ſuch, we are not to deny what our Reaſon tells us, becauſe it is not an Object of Sight; and that it is the Smallneſs of thoſe Glands that makes them to be imperceiptible by Sight is evident, ſince the beſt Microſcopes will not make the Terminations of thoſe Veſſels viſible which compoſe them: Yet I hope no Body will ſay, that the Veſſels have no ends, becauſe they cannot ſee them: If then we allow what is beyond Contradiction, viz. That the Terminations of the Veſſels cannot be perceived, we muſt allow that theſe Glands muſt be Inviſible, becauſe made up of thoſe Veſſels which are too fine to be perceived; and that thoſe Veſſels do communicate with one another, and conſequently make up ſuch Glands I have given ſuch Reaſons in my Book, and alſo laid down ſuch Experiments, that I need not to bring any more till thoſe are deficient.

Having anſwered all the Doctors Objections againſt my Book, I ſhall conſider what he ſays for himſelf: And Firſt, to paſs by all that heap of loud ſounding Words, which is vulgarly called Bombaſt, or Sound without Signification, I ſhall briefly take notice, that tho' I quoted Doctor Willis, and ſhewed him that his Notion of Heat was the ſame with it, as alſo that Doctor Willis had the ſame Notion of the Cauſe of Intermitting Fevers; and tho' I ſhewed him, that in Dropſies, he miſtakes the Effect for the Cauſe; and that in his Diſſertation of Mineral Waters, he only proves what no Body denies; he thinks it an Anſwer ſufficient to deny what is evidently true, and matter of Fact: For he ſays, he did not borrow his Notions from Dr. Willis, neither do I ſay ſo; but he acted the Plagiary (to uſe his own Words) or he ſtole them from him; for thoſe Words he makes uſe on himſelf.

But he ſays Dr. Willis aſſigns Fermentation to be the Cauſe of Heat; and that he aſſigns Colliſion; but any Body that knows the leaſt of the Corpuſcularian Philoſophy, would not think to come off with ſuch mean Evaſion, ſince Fermentation implies Colliſion, and Colliſion, which is the Effect of Motion, where it is violent enough, is but calling Fermentation by another Name, ſince Fermentation and Colliſion of the Parts of hot Bodies, are ſignificatively the ſame, tho' different Sounds.

Again, he ſays, He does not endeavour to prove an Acid in Vitriolated Waters, but that there is a perfect concocted Vitriol; which is as much as to ſay, he does not argue for an Acid, but for a perfect Acid, ſince Vitriol is an Acid; ſo that to prove Vitriolate Waters have Vitriol in them, is to prove Acid Waters have Acid in them; which I ſuppoſe none denies. But let the Doctor diſpute the Caſe, it's a fine eaſie Subject for him; he may tell his Countrymen ſuch Amuſing Stories; and that there is Salt in their Porrage if he will; perhaps he may convince them, by the ſame Strain, and Vigorous Arguments uſed at the Well near Haigh, and the Well prope Boulton in Lancaſhire.

But leſt People ſhould 〈…〉 Doctor really confuted, he ſays very little in vindication of himſelf, thinking if he ſhould uſe Arguments, it would make People take Notice of his Faults the more.

Therefore to divert their Obſervations, he thinks to make a Noiſe about a Latin Sentence, and Three Latin Words; as if convincing me there, would attone for the whole Notions of Value in his Book, taken from Dr. Willis; but I don't think I need to uſe any Arguments to perſwade Phyſicians, to believe what I have ſaid, ſince it is the generally received Opinion that Dr. Leigh hath nothing in his Book of his own worth owning.

But to come to his Scholarſhip, he tells me I don't underſtand Latin, and that I muſt go to School again: Poor good Natur'd Soul! he finds the Good Effects of my laſt Advice, and by his Quoting of Horace and Virgil, &c. I find he hath been at School, and taken it; and now like a ſweet Tempered Gentleman, he would needs adviſe me to make uſe of the ſame Means▪ This had been a Symptom of a good D • ſpoſition in Mind, had I not been mightily prejudiced; for there is ſcarce any Body that finds Benefit by a Medicine, but they uſually recommend it to every Body that they have a Reſpect for, whether they want it or not: Whether I want it or not, I don't pretend to ſay, but am ſure that notwithſtanding his Quoting Dr. Liſter, I muſt tell him, pro me, is not ſo good Latin, as Quod ad me attinet, or Quatenus me refert; but he hath a mind Dr. Liſter ſhould be blamed with him, as when Two Children fall out about their Play, the one thinks it hard to be whipped, and the other ſaved; ſo he muſt needs have Dr. Liſter in for Two Words at leaſt; with all my Heart, I am not againſt it; if he muſt be blamed, when the one hath the Ferula, let the other ſtand by.

The Doctor is not angry that I find fault with Sic Regero: But let him not be concerned, I only think it a mean Metaphor, and fitter to be uſed by him in the Genuine Senſe of the Word, than Metaphorically. But he cannot let one Sentence paſs; I carp at a harmleſs Word in proclivi, and ſay it ſhould be in promptu; but that he may be ſatisfied in this particular alſo, I ſhall tell him I deſigned it, as an Emblem of his Ingenuity; for I did not ſay in Proclivi was never uſed, but I meant, that his Thoughts which were in Proclivi, ought to be in Promptu; which was as much as to ſay, they were according to the Aetymology of the Word; i. e. Mean and Weak, inſtead of eaſie and fluent; and I only expreſſed my ſelf ſo ambiguouſly, to catch the Doctor; for I knew he'd fall foul upon any Bait; and truly I had a mind to lay up a Reſerve to Banter him; for I could not think the Doctor when rouſed, would have ſaid ſo little in Vindication of himſelf.

But again, what ſhall I do now, he ſays I fall hard upon Caſe; and truly his Caſe is ſuch, that I cannot avoid it; but he brings Cicero, Virgil, Ovid, Horace and Plautus againſt me, can I oppoſe them? No, but I can eaſily ſhew that they'll oppoſe him, for tho' he be ſo Vigorous, theſe Quotations are againſt him: For Opinioni haud Natura ſe Credidit, is falſe Latin; and to make it appear, we are to conſider, that Cicero in his Book, de Oratoriae Partionibus ſays, Ut in ſimplicibus Verbis, quod non & Latinum; ſic in Conjunctis, quod non eſt Conſequens V •• uperandum eſt. So that tho' Doctor Leigh hath joined Words, if the Connection be falſe, the Latin hath no Conſequence, and conſequently is culpable. And where the Senſe of Words are not connected, the Senſe is broke, and conſequently to be blamed. I ſhall therefore, becauſe he is ſo zealous upon his Sentence, ſhew him, that the Senſe wants Connection, and that none of the Quoted Sentences will help him: For in this Sentence, Opinioni haud Natura ſe Credidit, the Perſon is the Accuſative Caſe, and the Thing in the Dative, where if Credo be taken in a Grammatical Signification of that Word; it muſt ſignifie to believe, and then the Engliſh will be, I believe my ſelf to Opinion not Nature. But the Doctor thinks this abſurd himſelf; let us ſee then what the Authorities avail; The firſt Inſtance in Plautus which he brings is, credere ſe Neptuno. The Second is, Credere ſe Coelo praepetibus pennis, Virgil: The remaining Inſtances are, Credere ſuum animum Alicui, Terence, Credere uni omnia, Cicero. Libris Arcana Credere, Horace. Veritus ſe Credere nocti, Ovid. Now in all theſe, Credo ſignifies to Commit, as to commit ones ſelf to the Waves, to commit ones ſelf to the Air, to commit Secrets to Writing, &c. But if one ſhould ſay, I commit my ſelf to my Opinion, and not to Nature; how incoherent would the Senſe be, and ridiculous. But perhaps the Doctor will ſay, that Credo may ſ • gnify, I give my ſelf up to my Opinion and not to Nature; if he does, the Senſe is not much better; beſides, the Word Nature is uſed ſo ambiguouſly, that I cannot tell what he gives himſelf up to, till he informs me, what he means by Nature; for Nature is by ſome Philoſophers, and particularly the Honourable Mr. Boyle, uſed to ſignifie the Natural State of Bodies, or their Natural Texture and Modification; but to ſay a Man gives himſelf up to the Natural State of Bodies, or their Texture and Modification, muſt be nothing but Abſurdity; and let the Doctor try, if Credo will bear any other Engliſh Senſe better than what I have mentioned, ſtill remembring to keep the Perſon either in the Accuſative or Dative Caſe; if he cannot, as I am ſure he cannot, the Sentence is falſe Latin, according to Cicero, becauſe falſe Senſe, and conſequently Vituperandum; and not only ſo, but ſince Credo is uſed by Dr. Leigh, in a different Senſe from what it is in thoſe Citations, and the Authors Quoted, it is impoſſible to uſe the Word Credo in their Senſe, ſo as to make Grammatical Senſe of his Latin Words; beſides, as Cicero ſays, there muſt be a like Conſequence or ſimilar Signification, to make the Compariſon good; for it is not placing any Latin Words in the ſame Caſes and Order, that makes them Juſtifiable, except there be a parity of Senſe and Reaſon.

But why do I talk of Reaſon to the Doctor, ſince nothing is more Heterogeneous or diſagreeable to his Head, than any thing that concerns that Faculty; for my Book of the Heat of the Blood contains nothing, but what I hope I have given Reaſon for. Upon which Account▪ the Doctor fell out with it, was diſſatisfied, and in ſine was reſolved to ſhew his Wit; to which I gave an Anſwer, which I thought moſt agreeable to ſuch a Philoſopher; which had ſo good an Effect, as to bring the Doctor to a very little better Temper. But ſince I ſee he will be a Two-penny Author, I was reſolved now to talk Reaſon to him, finding it the propereſt Method to be revenged on him; for if Reaſon before made him ſo mad with me, it may have a ſtronger Influence, if reapplied to a weak Head.

And now I ſhall leave the World to judge what's become of Dr. Leigh's Reply, and Dr. Goodall's Letter. As for a Letter of Mine, that he tells me of; he hath taken a great deal of care to miſ-repreſent it, and to make it what he would have it: But the Senſe of what I writ was, that tho' there were a great many Learned and Ingenious Men in the Univerſity, they were not all ſuch, which was no Reflection, ſince it is mod certain, that thoſe that are come freſh from School, or of a ſmall ſtanding, cannot reaſonably be ranked amongſt Graduates in the Univerſity. And as for my Qualifying my ſelf for a Degree in a Month, or to perform the Exerciſe of a Day in an Hour, I do not think ſaying ſo, was calling the Exerciſe trifling; for I having ſtudied Five Years after I left Cheſter-School before I came there, and having ſtudied Philoſophy before, and read moſt Conttoverſies of Value, I do not think it much Preſumption in me to ſay, that that which Five Years hard Study had made eaſy to me, was difficult to thoſe that came freſh from School: and I preſume if Dr. Leigh ſhould be ſent to the Univerſity now, which were to be wiſhed, he'd be apt to ſay, the Exerciſe was eaſie; for when a Thing is Learnt, any thing is eaſie; and I had learnt moſt of thoſe things before; ſo that I gave my Friend an Account how eaſie it was to me then, and how much my paſt Studies had made thoſe light: So that what I ſaid, was nothing but what any Batchelour of Arts will ſay, viz. That at Four Years end they remember ſo well what they had learnt for the Four Years paſt, that were they to begin the Exerciſe of the firſt Year again, they could do in an Hour, what a freſh Scholar could not do in Twelve: And if a Batchelour at Four Years might without Reflection ſay ſo, I hope in the Sixth Year of a continued and hard Study, I might preſume to ſay, I could do that in an Hour, which a School boy could not do in Twelve.

But the Doctor would needs repreſent me as an Enemy to the Univerſities, that they might revenge his Cauſe; but I here declare and ſay, that nothing ſhall make me an Enemy to them, as long as I have the Uſe of my Reaſon; and I ſhall ever contribute my utmoſt Endeavours in Vindication of the Univerſities, till I have Reaſon to the contrary, which I hope I ſhall never have; and till then, as I ſhall make it my Buſineſs to make what Improvements I can in real Knowledge, ſo I ſhall to the utmoſt of my Power vindicate Learning, and oppoſe the Oppoſers of it.