Tarrugo Unmasked, OR An Answer to a late Pamphlet Entitled, Apollo Mathematicus BY GEORGE HEPBURN, M. D, AND Member of the College of Physicians at Edinburgh.  
— Tarrugus ducitur unco  
Spectandus.—  
To which is added by DOCTOR PITCAIRNE. The Theory of the Internal Diseases of the Eye Demonstrated Mathematically.  
EDINBURGH, Printed in the Year, M, DC, XCV.   

TO THE READER,  
IT will not, I hope, seem strange that I have undertaken to Answer a scurrilous Pamphlet lately set forth to defame Dr Pitcairne, and all true methods that are, or can be proposed to advance the certainty of Medicine. Having defended these methods and Writings when I was abroad, I thought myself more concerned to defend them at Home. Abroad I was put to defend them against the Reasonings of Ingenuous Persons, who were seeking the truth, and trying every thing that tended to any such end. But here I find, instead of Gentlemany and Philosophical Language, a Rhapsody of Lies, Calumnies, Scurrilous talk, in a word, a discourse savouring of the Dunghill that gave the Origine and Nourishment to the insect which brought forth the Pamphlet.  
The Fellow has concealed his name, but we must speak with him, and therefore a name he shall have: and he has himself helped us For having told what a Spanish gravity and constancy attends those who admire what is Old, to which party he inclines, he cannot take it ill if we give him a spanish name; and if we can in the Author of this Pamphlet discover the ways and Language, and other qualities which are proper to any Spaniard or Portugese whose Character is known in this place, that Person's name must we bestow on the Author of the Pamphlet. No spanish name is better known in this place than Tarrugoes. The farce that was some years ago acted under that name in the Cannongate, makes the Rogue well enough known: And the Character of Cheating, Lying, Burlesquing, Coining prophecies for sibylla (see page 24 of the Farce, and page 20 of the Pamphlet) calling Mathematicians Mad and Lunatic (see page 23 of the farce, and pages 45 and 47 etc. of the Pamphlet) which are the chief Ornaments of Tarrugoes Comedy, are also the chief Ornaments of Tarrugoes Pamphlet: For thus we'll henceforth call it.  
There are two humours, or fits rather, that our Tarrugo is often observed to fall in. Tho he has to deal with Persons who are no ways Mad or Lunatic, nor guilty of drinking Brandy, yet without any occasion given, he either falls a railing against Mad men, Crackt-brained, and Mercurial Noddles, Lunatics, etc. Or against Brandy-drinkers. May we inquire into the reason of this behaviour? since those he has to deal with are not tourly free of both those qualifications, it is plain, that he could not entertain any hopes of fixing such a Character upon them, unless he were really Mad, or wrote his Pamphlet over a Bowl of Punsh. We have therefore no other thing left us to suspect for the cause of Tarrugoes fits, but some Calamit as Domestica. Now because he is unknown to me as well as his whole Family, it is not possible to define, if both the qualifications he so often complains of, belong to any one in it, or are divided. Yet this seems probable, that Tarrugo is the Lunatic, for he speaks like one; and that the Moon has no influence on any other in his Family except when she is in the Cow-gate. This Domestic evil then that so easily besets him, must be the Cause of his Paroxysms.  
But the strangest thing in Tarruge's Pamphlet is, That the Fellow having published it on purpose to defame his Neighbours, and for that end filled it with notorious Lies, and villainous calumnies, yet he has the supererogating Impudence and Hypocrisy to complain of Atheism and contempt of Religion; while one of the great motives he had to rail at Doctor Pitcairn's writings was, because the Doctor in them has given a demonstration of the Deity's existence, the belief of which is so inconsistent with Tarrugoes practice. Yet there is one thing that to some may seem as strange; Whoever Tarrugo be, yet it's known That the papers which I call Tarrugoes were revised, corrected, and approven by one who twice in one year changed his Religion, upon how honest and religious principles I do not determine: Now it may seem strange, that this Gentleman has not struck out those passages about Atheism and Irreligion, both for his own, and for his Author's sake  
Tarrugo has subjoined an appendix about Certainty which gives us a farther proof of his ignorance in Mathematics, and of his want of Common sense too. There he undertakes to prove, That the matters of fact that are told by travellers and seamen about the Towns in China, are as evidently true and certain, as it is evident that two and two make four: That he who saw a thing done is not so certain of its being done, as an other is who saw it not, but heard it only by the hundreth hand perhaps. Which are thoughts so widely different from those of sober persons, that to entertain them seriously must be the highest degree of madness. But the paper de Inventoribus was not published for the use of such mean capacities as Tarrugoes. It was designed as a rule for deciding controversies about Inventions in Medicine and Mathematics, as appears from the paper itself. And in it are cautions delivered to hinder any ignorant or Malicious person from stretching or wresting what is there taugh; for in the last page of it the Doctor has these words. Eadem de causa, si Aristotelem vel Hippocratem concedatur fuisse infallibiles, certiores esse poterimus de us quae illi tradidere, quam de aliis quae aliorum Historicorum fidei acceptum referimus. By which it is evident that the Doctor treats only of Historians or Observators that are not inspired; and that in the Doctor's judgement, we have more than an Historical certainty of what is taught in the sacred Scriptures: But this kind of certainly was not the subject of that paper de Invento ribus. & so I think that paper may be left to defend itself.  
I come then to consider those parts of Tarrugoes Pamphlet where he pretends to be serious, and would seem Learned. The subject (as Tarrugo pretends) of the Debate is this. Dr. Pitcairne wishing to have Medicine brought a greater length towards certainty and perfection than hitherto it has been, proposed to take the help to Mathematics, a very certain science; He told what affinity the two sciences have, and he encouraged his hearers to embrace the proposal, by letting them see how many hard problems in Medicine hall been already solved by only two Mathematicians, Borelli and Bellini. But to this proposal Tarrugo refuses to consent, and very often says, but never proves, That Mathematics cannot be of use in Medicine; and withal owns himself Ignorant of Mathematics. From this assertion of Tarrugoes we may infer how Ignorant he is of Medicine, since he knows nothing of these many and noble purposes belonging to it, which Borelli and Bellini have Mathematically demonstrated: For how can we suppose him to know such things who will nor allow any use of Mathematics in Medicine? From this also we may judge, How fit Tarrugo is to discourse concerning the use of Mathematics in Philosophy and Medicine; he who by his own confession is, and by his way of writing proves himself to be entirely Ignorant of all Mathematics, and consequently of all the uses and purposes they can be aply'd to. Can One who does not understand the 47 prop. of the first of Euclid, be a fit judge indetermining where it can be of use, and where it can not? And can he pretend to understand the first Elements of Mathematics, who thinks (see page 85 of Tarrugoes Pamphlet) That there are or can be bodies and particles triangular or square.  
But these matters are more fully treated of in the following papers, in which the Reader is desired not to take it ill, If Hippocrate and Galen be treated without any respect to their pretended Infallibility (allowed them by Tarrugo) for I thought it always of ill consequence to a scribe Infallibility to Persons who knew much indeed in respect of their times, but were ignorant of what our times have discovered, especially since the lare discoveries are far more valuable and useful than the former. And though our Art be very highly obliged to those two, and many other Old boys, yet Hippocrate and Galen's fault was great in Introducing the sectarian philosophy into Medicine; and our Art had been much more beholden to them, if such Idiots as Tarrugo had not made Idols of them, and endeavoured to make their false Aphorisms pass for infallible conclusions.   

ANSWER TO A late Pamphlet Entitled Appolo Mathematicus  
THe Mathematical Science is the Art of finding out the properties of all figures which can happen to any Body, and of all the motions and effects of them; That is, the Art of finding out all that Bodies can do one with another; for there is nothing done or happeneth in nature, but by Bulk, Figure or Motion: and therefore a perfect Knowledge of Mathematics is what no Man can pretnd to, for it would amount to a perfect knowledge of all natural things. This does not binder but that many excellent persons have given themselves to the Study of that Science; for tho' they knew well that they could not arrive to a perfection, yet they found that by following the steps and method of the preceding Mathematicians, they could grow wiser than their Masters, and surmount difficulties insuperable to those who are ignorant of Mathematics. There is nothing in Natural Philosophy (of which Medicine is a part) that deferves to be taken notice of, except what is invented and demonstated by the Mathematicians; and this is the cause of Philosophie's being so long in so low estate The Mathematicians were so intent upon the Geometrical Foundation and the Abstract Speculation of Figutes that they had no leisure to look abroad, and to draw those Conclusions which are useful to the Philosophers: But now that the Temple of Geometry is built, the Mathematicians have both Leisure and Inclinations to assist their Neighbours, and to lend them Propositions and Truths useful in bringing their Works to a greater perfection. Mr. Newton has effectually helped the Philosophers; and Borrelli, but above all Bellini has given great light in Medicipal matters, only by the help of Mathematics: And it is noways strange that the Knowledge of Mathematics should be so useful in the Theory of Medicine, since Mathematics are the Theory of the effects produced in Nature by the means of Figure, Bulk, and Motion, which effects and events comprehend those also which appear to us as Diseases and the Actions of Remedies; And theresore, tho' it is not expected that Medicine by the help of Mathematics should be brought to its absolute and uttermost perfection, (for that is not expected in Natural Philosophy) Yet it is evident from what has been here explained, and from what some Men have done as Bellini) that we should have brought Medicine to an incredible perfection, if Mathematical methods had been used, at least a far greater perfection than can be had by any other methods. For it is most manifest, that if Medicine can be brought to any degree of perfection, it must be brought to it by the help of that Science, which teaches what are the effects of such and such motions in Bodies Solid and Liquid of such and such Bulks, Consistences, Figures, and velocities combined in all manner of proportions: for the Actions, Diseases, and Cures that happen and are done in our Bodies, are effects which result from those Figures, Motions, quantities and proportions treated of and demonstrated in the Mathematics; and theresore, it we can have any clear knowledge of Diseases etc. We muft be beholden for it to Euclid, Apollonius, Archimedes, Newton, and to Borrelli and Bellini, with others who have made use of Euclid to advance the knowledge of Medicine. And it serves to no purpose to say, that the Fabric of our Body is intricate, and many things in it fall not under our Senses for the more intricate it is, the mote need is there and Reason to use the most general and comprehensive methods for finding the mysteries of that structure: And since the Mathematical methods are these only which can serve us in this design, they ought to be tried. And we have this motive to encourage us, to wit, that several things which passed for Truths in Medicine while the Writers of it neglected the assistance of Mathematics, have been found to be gross Errors when viewed by a Mathematician; And many things that could not be understood not determined by Physicians when they did not consult with the Mathemeticians, are now by the help of Mathemaricks fully explained and understood. And of this you have subjoined an Instance. It is a Mathematical explication of the moft considerable diseases of the Eyes, never before understood by any Writers of Medicine, and that only because they did not use the Mathematics to help them in an enquiry of this Nature. From that explication it appears how ridiculous the Writers of Medicine have been both in the Theory and practice of the diseases incident to the Eyes, and how naturally the true method of Cure is found out from the true and Mathematical Theory of the Disease. If some persons have quibled and railed against this Invention, it is only because they are Ignorant and ill natured, for the Doctors Thoery in this affair is pure Demonstration.  
But the Doctor has given another instance of the use of Geometry in Medicine. There arose a question, If purging be the best cure for Fever? neither they who affirmed it to be, nor they who denied it could give any sufficient reason for their opinion, but quibled and adduced arguments too mean to be used by Schoolboys when they dispute about Ens Rationis, or if Logic be ane art, etc. (for what learn'der are men disputing without the help of Mathematics, about natural things, than schoolboys? They have both learned their Logicks and Metaphysics and instead of Natural Philosophy mathematically handled, they have learned either from Aristorle and Hippocrate, that the World consists of four Eliments, or from Descartes, that it's made up of three; both equally false and useless: So that no more can be expected of solid Theory from the one than from the other. Atlast Doctor Pitcairne applied his Mathematics to the question, and had solved it by a method not to be imitated by those Puny Quiblers.  
If the greatest part of Physic be not Mathematically cultivated, it is because few Physicians have used Mathematical reasons, and one man or two cna not go through with so great a work.  
How little then is Medicine and Mankind obliged to a Cabal of ignorant Block heads, who do not only not use any Mathematical reasoning in Medicine, but cry out upon Mathematical methods as useless, yea hurtful when applied to Physic! But the best is, These men who cry out upon the use of Mathematics. What a noble discourse than can we expect about the use of that Science and its reach from them? Certainly no better than from School boys.  
The difference will be only here. That if some of this Anti mathematic Cabal have been Comedians, and earned some money by writing copies of Samuel Colvins poem against the Whigs betor it was printed, or if others have been Readers and School. masters in a country-parish, Then we shall have a book full of scraps taken from poets and Rymers, Bawdy-house language &c: and then when nothing prevails, we shall be attaqued by a Mr Precentor with a Text of Scripture, which (now having lost the privilege of reading in the Kirk) he throws instead of a stone or some heavy argument against his Nighbour, & makes that an instrument of strife which was brought into the World as comprehending the best and most persuasive inducements to peace. Now, we can expect none of these things from Schoolboys who likewise will show a Bashfulness where there men are Impudence it self: But the serious parr will be the same as if it were writ by Schoolboys, To whom the Mathematics have yet done no good; Except one should think that those may have forgot much of what they once knew after the manner of School boys, and so speak nonsense even in the sense of the Latter, and appear low and mean to the very capacity of Children. Of this I shall give perpetual instances in Tarrugoes pamphlet, where he speaks of any thing after a serious manner, no Schoolboy being capable of so mean Nonsense as he than contents himsels with. Every man brings to do his work the Talents he has, if the work be urgent, and give no delay; Tarrugo with his Comerads have no Mathamaticks, yet they would gladly be thought advancers and improvers of Medicine: They have then brought Rhymes, Scraps of School-Authors and Farces, Stage-talk, Buffoonrie, Dialogues with Boys; and then to please both you and the Boys, they present you with skilful Rope-dancers, and immediately after, fall a playing Juggler tricks with Screw-nails. And thus they advance Medicine many ways; whereas their Antagonist, who cares for none of those things, has only the Mathematics, and nothing else to trust unto.  
The design of the Drs discourse, being to advice the Writers and practisers of Medicine, to abstain from drawing consequences therein from the position or principles of any Sect of Philosophy. (a thing every day done both abroad and at home) he thought fit to show them the right way, or put them in company of those who are in it, and to advice them to follow their Example: Therefore considering, that Medicine is so far like to Astronomy, that before a Conclusion can be framed in eirber, there must be a sufficient number of observations made; and that the observations made in either of them preceded any Knowledge Men have of the nature of the things anent which they have these observations; He choose to persuade Physicians to make observations with as great care, and in as great a number, in regard of the Medical Art, as the Astronomers (who have already succeeded in heir design) had done in theirs; and to rely as much on observation, and as little on any Sect of Philosophy as the others do, since the principles of these Sects are entirely uncertain, and since they have not built their positions concerning the natures of things upon observation, but upon precarious and ill Reasonings. The Doctor had too good cause for taking some pains to inculcat this for the knew that Hippocrat has built most of his Doctrine upon the idle and groundless belief, of all things being made and done by Heat and Cold, moist and dry, upon which he builds all his Medicinal art, (and for which Aristotle is so laughed at) whom in this nevertheless, Galen followed and extolled, and all the Writters of Medicine (except a very few) till this time. And these two, Hippocrat and Galen, are by the Author of the Pamphlet ser up, see page 32. l. 13. etc. as our guides in Medicine, though they have built and made a Systeme of it upon that rotten Foundation of the 4 Elements and the four first qualities, see page 96, where he says, Medicine can only be advanced by Hippocrat's method, which they would not have done, had they made Sufficient observation. And that the Doctor has reason, appears from the Pamphleteer, who is so addicted to Hippocrat's sect and philosophy, that what Hippocrate has delivered not from observation, but from his principles of philosophy, this Author admits for truth, and so could not forbear to tell us, pag. 46. That Hippocrat's aphorisms are so many conclusions drawn from along tract of observations you see he believes his aphorisms all for unths, whereas most of them are false, and contrary to every man's observation; and consequently have never been built on, and drawn from a long tract of experiences, but on Hippocrat's idle Philosophy witness the 31 sect. 5. which has cost so many women their lives, only because they are treated by Physicians like to our Pamphleteer, and of the same principles with him.  
But that which is as considerable in this affair, is; That by imitating the Astronomers, we should have made our observations in medicine, distinct and well circumstantiated, and consequently such as an useful consequence could be drawn from them: whereas Hippocrate very often in observations of the greatest moment has altogether neglected the material conditions and circumstances of the observation, and then gives us aphorisms useless in the hands of men of sense, but pernicious when laid hold on by such as our Pampheleteer Witness the 9 aph. sect. 3 and the said 31 sect. 5. witness all his aphorisms (which are very many) concerning the Crises or Cools of Fevers, which he has drawn either from the principles of his philosophical sect, and not from observation, or from observation so ill circumstanciated, that they oftener fail than hold true; and are pernicious as oft as the patient is traited by one who thinks, that Hippocrat's aphorisms are conclusions drawn from a long tract of observations.  
Now Sir, there is one thing to be yet remarked. Some Astronomers before they had made a sufficient number of exact observations, have attempted to make a Systeme, as they called it, and to draw too large consequences, and such as required more observations. These erted, by quitting the method and way they were in. Others, after there had been made a sufficient number of observations, for want of Geometry, that is, Reason sufficient and judgement how to use and compare the observations, have erted and drawn wrong consequences. These errings do not make the right way wrong. For we see that Mr. Newton has perfited the Systeme by bringing sufficient strength of Geometry, or right reason to be applied to the sufficient observations, whereof the most considerable was made by the Kepler.  
It the Physicians would make a number of observations as sufficient and exact in their Trade, as the Astronomers have done in theirs, we should be able to promise as much in the events of Diseases as they can do in the events of the motions of the Planets. Till such observations, and so many on each Disease and Cure be made, the Doctor in his Oration desires the Physicians to refrain from making Systemes, or drawing consequences, that is, from making Aphorisms. Likewise, if it shall be found that a sufficient number of exact observations is made in any Disease, yet the Doctor had cause to advise that Physician to abstain from building a Systeme on them, or drawing consequences & conclusions from them, who had not enough of Judgement and Art to compare them aright. And because this Art is not acquired but by use. (for it is more likely that a Man shall judge aright in an affair who has been used to weigh circumstances, and consider things calmly, and look well on every side, than another of no greater Spirit, who never applied himself to be serious in any thing) Therefore the Doctor recommended the study of Geometry and Mathematics to Physicians, that they may learn to reason justly, and compare things observed in Physic as exactly (as far at least as the nature of the observations can admit) as they had been used to do in Mathematics. And therefore this Pamphleteer ought not to meddle with drawing conclusions in Medicine, since he is one of those (see page 22.) To whom the Mathematics have never done good.  
And the Doctor was the more pressing to this, Because all the actions of our Body, and the Bodies that act upon ours, as Medicaments, etc. are the motions of some fluid or solid things, and that these all observe the Laws of motion treated of and demonstrated in the Mechanics. And for this reason, did the Doctor recommend the study of Mathematics to his Hearers.  
Now how bravely is all this refuted, by our Pamphleteers saying, That all wise men know, that Medicine is of a quite other nature than Astronomy? What if it be? Are we therefore not to be exact in our observations, or are we not to follow a Medicine built on observations, because the Astronomers build on them? But says our Pamphleteer, the observations made by Physicians in sundry places, agree, and those made by Physicians in sundry places, as France, Egypt, Rome, do not agree; and therefore different methods must be used in different places, and the the whole Art of Physic must still be conjectural in respect of Astronomy, page 46. and 47.  
Here is a new confirmation of the necessity of imitating the Astronomers in the exact way of making Observations. Hippocrate, Galen, and many others in different Country's have made different observations concerning the same thing. because they did not consider what influence the Climate and Diet had upon the observations; which if they had considered, the observations in sundry places made upon the same things had been found to be the same. But the Astronomers, though in making their observations in different places, they often found the same Star at the same time, not in appearance in the same place; yet they wisely considered the different degree of Refraction that is in different places, the different altititude. etc. And this being accounted for, they found their observations agreeing, because they made them with more exactness than these made with, which our Pamphleteer would have us to embrace. And it seems to me that all the cause of this outcry against the Doctor is this. That the Pamphleteer being very desirous to be esteemed a learned Physician, he finds himself not qualified enough to make exact observations; and therefore he'll set up with Hippocrat's, and cry down all better ones, or any design of making better ones, and then he knows he cannot be far outdone, if we'll follow his Example. But the Doctor designing to put Men in a way of bringing Medicine to a greater perfeceion, (a design not very criminal) advised to make more, and more perfect observations; And that the Hearers might understand what exactness and perfection in these is required, he desired them to take model of that from the Astronomers. This was precife, and so not very liable to be misunderstood.  
But our Pamphleteer wonders page, 48. That Physicians should be desired to imitate the Astronomer, who are divided into Sects. For my part I know no Sect among them. If any of them too rashly built a Systeme on observations, exact indeed, but not numerous enough, (as they could not be numerous enough before the use of Telescopes, by which many things are observed that were not observed at all by the Ancients) what is that to us, who have ways of making more observations, and who see Astronomy founded now upon exact, and sufficiently numerous observation, without any dissension? Because some Men went out of the right way? and others who went not out of it have succeeded to admiration, must we therefore defert the right way? And yet this is our Pamphleteers way of reasoning. If any of the Astronomets of late went wrong, it was not in making wrong observations, but in trusting to Aphorisms set forth by a Pope, and Cardinals, as our Pamphleteer trusts to Hippacrats; that is, in taking them for conclusions drawn from a long tract of observations: for infallibility isequivalent to all this.  
The Doctor thought fit to desire Physicians to imitat the Astronomers in building their Art and Theory upon observations, because the greater part had built upon the principles of the Sects that set up for Philosophy, and these principles being more uncertain than observations, it was no wonder if their Medicine was very uncertain. And for this the Doctor desired Physicians to abstain from the Investigation of Physical causes, that is, the absolute and intimat nature of things; For since these Causes are assigned different by the different Sects, and and none them has any foundation for that they assert as the Doctor proves in the TWO page of his Oration, what help can such precarious causes bring to a physician? It is the principle of a great Sect in philosophy: That all things are made up of a Meteria, a forma Substantialis from which issued forth the four first qualities, Heat, Cold, Moist and dry. The Physicians generally 'em, braced this opinion because it was almost conform to Hippocrat's, who taught that all consisted of the four Elements whose natures were Hot. Cold, Moist and Dry. Now these Philosophical Physicians without any sincere and exact observations laid it down as a Maxim that Opium is Cold, and this according to them was the nature of Opium and the physical cause of all its Actions and effects on our Bodies: For by telling it was Cold, they by their principles pretended to have told its nature. This being believed they were sure ro use Opium only in Hot Diseases (for they as rashly determined about the nature of Diseases and distinguished them into Hot, Cold, etc.) and becauss a Fever, a Frenzy etc. were reckoned Hot, therefore in these Opium was used to very bad purpose. And because some Tumours were by them reckoned Cold, therefore the Cicuta (which they reckoned Cold without sincere and exact observation too) was condemned, as to its external use in such Tumours, though it be singularly useful in healing them. This is all the advantagee Medicine has from investigating and determining the physical causes, embracing a philosophical Sect and neglecting to intimat the Astronomers. Because Hippocrat had without any ground or Knowledge of Anatomy taught that our Life consisted in a calidum in, natum, and that this was our nature and the physical cause of all our acrions and had observed that a certain quantity of Opium had killed any Animal, he and his followers inferred that the nature of Opium consisted in Cold; And is it not fit to warn physicians of the insufficiency and hurtfulness of such a method? For though the humour of building Medicine on the Hypothesis of Hot and Cold etc. be not every where predominant amongst the physicians as it was some years ago yet the inclination & disposition to build on the uncertain and precarious principles of a sect instead of making exact observations is predominant: So that those who reject Aristotle's philosophy as useless, hurtful to Medicine, admit Hippocrat's or Des. Carter's that is equally prejudical and uncertain. Now that the Doctor is not the only person of this opinion is apparent from Mr. Newton's preface to his Book entitled The Mathematical principles of Natural philosophy, where he has these words. Multa me movent ut nonnihil suspi. cer omnia naturae phaenomena ex viribus quibusdam pen dear quibus corporum particuloe per causas nondum cogni. tas vel in se mutuo impelluntur & secundum figuras regu. lares coherent, vel ab in invicem fugantur & recedunt: quibus viribus ignotis Philosophi hactenus naturam frustra tentarunt. You see Mr. Newton thinks that physical causes are yet unknown, and are like to remain unknown till we use a Mathematical method for finding them. This is evident from what he say in the end of the 11 Section. lib, 1. Princip In Mathesi investigandoe sunt virium quantitates & rationes illae, quae ex conditionthus quibuscunque positis consequentur: deinde uhi in physicam descenditur confer endie sunt hae rationes cum phaenomenis, ut innotescat quaenam virium conditiones singulis corporum generibus competant. Et tuns demum de virium speciebus, causis & rationibus physicis tutius disputare licebit.  
The Dr, than had reason and authority for him when he advised the Physicians in their reasonings to abstain from the Sectarian. Philosophy and lay aside the Investigation of Physical Causes after the manner hitherto used by the Sects: Since these are altogethet unknown, and are not to be fond till we first find out the virium rationes et quantitates, which if we could find (and we can only find them by the help of Mathamaticks) we should have Medicine made perfect before any Physical cause were known. That which makes this Scribles so much concerned for Physical Causes is because he has learned a little of Aristotle's Philosophey, which is no, thing but a Metaphyfical discourse, that is, a quibbling and speaking nonsense about physical Causes, and this he would have pass for good reasoning in Medicine. The difference then betwixt the Doctor and him is this, The Dr when he applied himself to Medicine perceived that many things in it were handled a very unsatisfactory Method, and therefore-resolved to try a method that he had learned in reading Mathamatical Writers, this he found successul, and coming to read Borelli and Bellini he found they had used that same method in medicinal affairs but with agreat deal of more success, in as much as they are fat greater Mathamaticians than he is. This our Scribbler Tarrugo perceiving resolved that he also would make a Noise amongst the learned, though it were no better nor more melodious than that of a Culross gridiron or girdle amongst fine Violins. He had no Mathematics to carry him through but he had learned Logicks and Metaphysics, had a Natural stock of impudence, and an acquired one of Stage Buffoonry (as his Book shows) and thus accontred he resolves to burlesque and rail at any thing he understood not, and throw scraps of Logicks and Metaphysic's before his Reader, which beingrealand downright Nonsense, are harder to be understood than the Mathematics, and so Tarrugo must appear the profoundest Scholar of the two. Thus you see every man for improving his Art brings the Talents he is endowed with. And if by so doing he has any hopes of bringing himself into Reputation, he'll hide none of his qualities: For the Dr, has vented his Mathematics and has inculcated the necessity of them in a professor of Medicine very often, well knowing he had some knowledge of them. Tarrugo on the other hand being no less greedy of reputation and employment, but ignorant of Mathamaticks, pretends there is no use of that science in Medicine, and in a Book of 12 sheets proves that Metaphysical Nonsense, Impudence, Lying and Calumniating, Nestie and Scurrilous Ribaldry can do as well: Forby these Arts he has seen a Physician borough to Reputation. 'Tis true some Mathematical blades will not esteem him, but these are Few. But you'll ask me perhaps if any man be so mad as to think Medicine will be bettered by lying and Buffonery. for that is the question, and improved more that way than by just and Mathematically exact reasoning. Yes Tarrugo thinks it, for he having seen some persons by such artifices brought to some reputation did by a very Metaphysical inference conclude that the method which betters and is advantageous to the Artist is also advantageous to the Art. Here is the depth of Logicks and metaphysics, and because it is very great, I leave in to the Dr himself to fathom. The worst that can be faid is that Tarrugo had no mind to better and improve Medicine, but enlarge his own employment by this method, which he has found to agree with a practical Art more than does the speculative science of Mathematics.  
But to return to our Pamphleteer who is certainly much disobliged by this proposal the of Doctors, for he rails at him most unmercifully; he at last, page 49 gravely tells, that nothing can be of more dangerous consequence, than to set up a Practical Art and a speculative science upon the same foot. Here we have an instance given us by our unthinking Pamphleteer, of the folly of meddling with the design to improve Medicine by the help of the common Philosophy taken from a Sect, and without the help of Mathematics.  
The Dr in his discourse desired us to consider, that Medicine was of more use and moment than Astronomy (pag, 18, Orat. Inaug, Aequum enim non est, ut vitae Humanae quam curiositati minus consulatur) and therefore we ought to be at least as exact in making observations anent Diseases, etc. as the others are in making theirs anent the motions or irregularities of the Celestial Bodies. This, is it not sufficiently refuted by telling us, that it is dangerous to set up a practical Art, and a speculative Science upon the same foot? That is to say, it is very dangerous to make exact observations in Medicine (the practical Art) since that is the very thing which those speculative men the Astronomers do, and succeed so well by. What improvement can Medicine expect from one that reasons thus?  
This reasoning is a demonstration at least of the hurtfulness of vain Philosophy. Our Author had said indeed he had never got either good or hurt from the Mathematics: But here he lets us see, that he has got hurt enough from his Philosophy. He had heard at School, a distinction made between a practical and speculative knowledge; he had heard it said by Philosophers, who were no Physicians, that medicine is a practical one, and Mathematics is a speculative; he had since often read it in Hippocrat and Galen, who spend many words in telling us stories (very useless and false) anent Medicin's being a practical, and not a speculative knowledge: This he swallowed down greedily, because it was like to save him the pains of thinking and studying. And so great influence has this Jargon of practical and speculative on him, that it hinders him from seeing that Medicine is to be built on accurate Observations, after he was told that a knowledge (which he was taught to call speculative) is founded upon them. But perhaps it will be charity to Inform him better. All that a good Physician does, is, that he makes observations on plants, minerals, and divers Bodies about us; also on diseases and the Bodies subject to them; and lastly, advises the sick man to make use of some of those Plants, etc. if he would be in health. The Astronomer observes likewise, the motions and properties of some Stars in respect of one another, and foertels, in what time and place they'll be in Conjunction, or Opposition, and such like events. Now what is it in Medicine that makes it more a practical Art than Astronomy? But our Tarrugo knows not what Astronomy is for, he confesses, he never got good or hurt from the Mathematics, that is, he never learned any part of them: And consequently, is not capable to judge, whether they be useful for a Physician, and if Physicians should imitate them and follow their methods: and by this it is manifest, that he has meddled with an affair which he understands not.  
But it is not amiss to consider a little more this Metaphysical reason of our Tarrugo. It is of dangerous consequence, says he, to set up a practical art and a speculative Science upon the same foot; and therefore Astronomical and Mathematical methods are dangerous and useless at the best in Medicine. Now Sir, every body knows that Navigation cannot be practised to any purpose and with safety or assurrance without the knowledge of Trigonometry (a part of Geometry or Mathematics, and as speculative as the Astronomy) yea without making observations like the Astronomers. Must Navigators leave off this course and method of guiding their voyages, because Navigation is a practical Art (as practical indeed as Medicine) and Geometry or Astronomy are speculative Sciences?  
Why but the Astronomers are divided into Sects, says Tarrugo. And therefore Navigators must not follow their example nor imitat their observations, as to their exactness. Now I never before heard of different Sects in regard of observations amongst the Astronomers, for this is the affair. But Tarrugo hearing the word Sect, found he must make some use of it: And therefore to hinder us from being as exact in seeing and hearing or observing as the Astronomers are, warns us that they are of different Sects, That is, they see and hear after different manners. Now Sir though I have had the occasion to converse with some Astronomers, of whom some though the Earth is the Centre, and others thought the place belonged to the Sun rather, yet they observed after one and the same manner, and saw and heard like one another. They were all alike exact in remarking the circumstances and conditions of their observations, and of what they saw or heard. And it is this exactness that the Navigators successfully imitat, and Physicians ought to imitat if they also would be successful.  
But Tarrugo will tell us that Astronomy or the Mathematical Science is of quite another nature than Navigation, even as much as it is of another nature than Medicine: And therefore Navigarors are not to borrow from or imitat either the Astronomers, or other Mathematicians, And therefore your ships are to be guided as of old in the days of Hippocrat: they are to creep alongst the Shoar (for there is no trusting to Astronomical observations quoth Tarrugo) where often on a Rock it will be found that Ars longa est, vita brevis, the only Aphorism of Hippocrat drawn from exact observation, but not of Physicians more than of Seamen.  
If the Seamen of Europe can be persuaded to lay aside the use of Astronomy and Mathematics upon the reasons given by Tarrugo, I'll engage for the Physicians, that they shall imitate the Navigators. And therefore if Tarrugo would deseat Doctor Pitcairn's design he must address himself to the Navigators first. But I know not by what ill fate Huggens and some French Mathematiciens have written of late about Navigation and I cannot guests how Tarrugo will behave before such severe fel. lows.  
In the page 56, he is very angry with the Doctor for saying that, Corpus omne in alterius cujuscunque generis corpus transformari potest. This, be says, is very false, unless he mean, pag. 57 That the thing implies no contradiction, from which, says he, nothing at all can be concluded. Now, the Doctor said only, that the thing is possible; and our Pamphleteer, after many fine sayings or Aphorisms to the contrary, concludes that indeed the thing is not impossible, but of no consequence. Now Sir, the Dr took this saying from Mr Neuton. who at the entry of his third Book Princip, Mathematic: sets down the same thing in the very same words as certainly true, for he had made it his third Hypothesis, by which he means there a Postulatum, for Hypothesis assumed by Mathematicians is a Postulatum, or Propositio veritats notae. And accordingly Mr Newton makes use of it to prove a very material point in the 6, prop, lib, 3. But, says Tarugo, nothing can be concluded from it. Has not the Doctor concluded from it, That the parts of all Earthly Bodies are subject to the same rules of motion, or Mechanics? And Mr Neuton uses the same proposition to the very same purpose, when the deduces from it, that the Aether or Materia subtiles must have weight proportional to the quantity of its matter and consequently comes under the same Laws to which the Earth in its motion, or any part of it is subjected. I do easily believe, Mr Newton never saw the Materia subtilis, yet he adventured to prove that it has this property, (if any such matter be) by virtue whereof it is to be treated Mathematically. Where is then the absurdity, that the Doctor without seeing the Liquidum Nervorum (much grosser than the Fluidum subtle of Mr Descartes) has affirmed the same thing to hold in that Liquor, since Mr Newton has demonstrated the thing so universally, that his proof reaches further than the Animal Spirits? Here again we have a proof of our Pamphleteers Ignorance in Mathematical matters, when (pag, 59) He bids the Doctor let us see the animal Spirits, as if that were necessary for demonstrating their properties by which they Act in our Bodies. Did ever any Mathematician see the Diameter of any Body or a Mathematical right line, and yet how many properties do these men demonstrate anent those things! We see and find the effects of the Animal Spirits; and from such effects, and from the general Laws of motion common to all Bodies we can demonstrate many things anent them without seeing them. But this is a lesson he should have learned at the School. In a word, the Doctor affirms, that any body (under whatsomever form) has weight, and obeys the Laws demonstrated by the the Mathematicians, or Mechanic Writers, propertionally to the matter it contains: And he concludes from this that as the Astronomers have gone a great length in applying these rules and propositions anent motion, etc. to the Stars and Bodies on this Earth both solid and liquid, so Physicians may come a greater length than they have yet come, if they apply the same, or like propositions for determining the motions of the Liquors that run through our Bodies, after that they have made proportionally as many observations in their Trade, and as exact, as the Astronomers have made.  
But before I leave this subject, I must examine a passage in Tarrugoes Pamphlet which he thinks no body can prosperously attaque, and which nevertheless exposes his weakness, and ignorance most shamefully.  
It is the 17 P pamphlet, where after having rehearsed a few rude & silly observations, (for he hates all a curate ones because Mathematicians love them) upon which he says Medicine depends, he at last tells us, Something, was still a wanting (to wit after the observations had been made) to finish the picture or art of Physic and this was reason etc. without any Mathematics. Now this is just such a Ridiculous piece of Nonsense, as if one should desire the Master of ship to use his reason without his Mathematics or what he had learned by their help) to find the latitude and longitude etc. for would it not be a very easy and profitable thing to lay aside his quadrants, compass and pendulum Clocks, and instead of them have recourse to the Quakers spirit or reason? If a Man would use his reason to good purpose, he must inform and fortify it with the knowledge of these Truths which belong to the matter he would reason about, and therefore since Medicine is a part of natural Philosophy and must be cultivated with it not after the method of the Sectarians but of the Mathematiciens, it is evident that a physician who would reason to purpose, must have strengthened his mind or reason with the Mathematical truths that can be applied to Medicine: for without this what an insigunificant thing is this reason? If a Myops and Presbyta: (or one who sees ill at a distance, and another who sees ill what is at hand) came to ask Tarrugo, what are the best means of helping the defects of their sights: are they not like to be mightily helped by his altogether unassisted reason? but we shall so far help him as to tell him that such people can only be helped by the use of Glazes, and now I desire him to tell by this reason without the help of (not his own, for he has none, but of other people's) Mathe, maticks what glass is fit for the Myops and what for the Presbyta: And that he would give directions for making each of them. This would perhaps bring naked reason (for reason not assisted either by Law, Divinity, or Mathematics is the reason of Children before they come to have any knowledge of things that are solid) into some reputation: For I assure you Doctor Gregory the Savilian Professor Astronomy thinks it no small matter to have taught in his Element a Optica, lentem fabricare date oculo inservientem, that is to make a Glass fit for any proposed eye, and that with the help of much Mathemmaticks.  
If a person whose sight or eyes looked clear and free of any outward or visible blemish, but were disturbed by the images and appearance of Midges or other small dark objects, shall ask Tarrugoes advice, and withal tell him that a giddiness sometimes accompanied that symptom, troublesome even on the high Street, especially afterdrinking too much Brandy, what think ye will be his advice? certainly he must use his most defecat reason here, for for it may be the case of his dearest— for aught I know Well, he has in print told us his advice built on the observations of his Ancients and finished by his own single and precise reason or spirit in the hat. He tells us without Mathematics indeed (for it is plainly against observation and Mathematical reason) that the Disease is a cataract beginning, and therefore refers the patient to the Cure applied by the vulgar Writers of eh Cataract. But this will not do, for it is Mathematically certain that it is a Disease quite different from a Cataract which the patient complains off. And for this reason I fancy the patient finding no effect of his advice, may continue in the old trade and distemper too  
When we speak then of using reason to finish or find out right conclusions in any science, we must understand by that reason, a mind or faculty endued and instructed with sundry propositions of truth anent the subject of the Art or Science we treat of. And since Medicine is a part of Natural Philosophy, and Natural Philosophy is not right handled by Reason not assisted by Mathematics as experience tells us daily, it is evident that Medicine requires that same help. It is true Philosophy has been handled by reason unassisted with Mathematics, but this is the Philosophy of the Sects, Nonsense and falsehoods joined together, and the very metod Tarrugo handles Medicine. I would said know a reason (separate from and not armed with Mathematics or Mathematical Philosophy) that Tarrugo can give for his indications (as he speaks) which any old wife shall not give as well? And this is Turrugoes way of emproving Medicine. In a word, when a person has made observations and would know what use he is to make of them and would be instructed in the surest method of drawing useful consequences from what he has observed, To tell him only that he is to follow Reason, Is as ridiculous and useless, as it would be silly and impertinently pedantic for one that's asked, Who he is, To answer he is a Man.  
But he gives a most subtle Reason why Mathematics are not to be used in Medicine: The Machine says he of our body is of a quite different nature from artificial ones, which can be taken down and set up again at ones pleasure. There could be nothing said in fewer words so entirely opposite to common sense. Do we not open and dissect and view the parts of humane Bodies, by doing which we learn their Fabric, use and actions of their parts, and what hurt they can or use to sustain from the operations of other Bodies? Now these other Bodies such as Drugs, Air, etc. in their actings on our Machine's do not consider that they can not be set up again (though I hope they shall) nor do the parts and liquors of our Machine's consider any such matter, but both the one and the other act according to the Laws of motion found out and demonstrated by the Mathematiciens, and is not then the Mathematical Knowledge useful for understanding the properties. Symptoms good or bad and Diseases of our Bodies, since these are the actions or their effects of other Bodies upon out Machine's or of the Liquors &c, in our Machine's acting according to the Laws of Motion and Mechanics: for though the man may be a Rope-dancer or Stage-player, yet the parts of our Bodies are void of that cunning. But we must consider a little, What Tarrugo says that Mathematics are useless in unfolding the Mysteries of our Machine's, because, says he, our Machine's cannot be taken down and set up again as artificial ones. Now one of the most noble parts of our Machine, or rather one of the noblest Machine's that compose our Body is the Eye, which cannot be set up again after it's taken down, no more than our Bodies can. Yet this Eye is so well known as to its structure, action and use, that it is the subject of a most considerable part of the Mathematics or Mathematical Philosophy: and so great a length have the Mathematiciens come in explaining the sight and defects of it and their remedies. That if Physicians would apply Mathematics as discreetly to the other parts of our Bodies, we should have a Medicine incredibly improven. Yet the Eye cannot be set up again after being taken down, a thing that the Writers of Optics have not found any hindrance from in their Mathematical atchevements. So that though a Machine cannot be easily set up again it ceases not to be subject to the Laws of Mechanics and consequently to Mathematical reasoning. But this Tarrugo was loath should be true because he understands not Mathematics.  
There is yet one advantage that the use of Mathematics brings ot Medicine, which we have not mentioned, but it is a very great one, and serves to abridge and facilirat that redious work of making observations. The Physicians have made very many observations, but few good ones. I do not now call most of them so, because they are not exact; but taking them all to be exact, yet very sew of them are of use or serve to any good purpose: And it is very hard for a man that has no Mathematics to perceive which are those few that can be made use of in building a right Theory or advancing the practice of Medicine. If once we can by a Mathematical Eye discern what observation is necessary to draw such a conclusion from (for it were needless to warn you that the Mathematiciens must be most skilful in drawing right conclusions since they are most used to it) than we shall abstain from making or taking notice of the greatest part of observations that we read or see others heap up to no purpose. And this would abridge wonderfully the work of observing. That you may understand this a little better, be pleased to take notice of what Tarrugo says page 16. When in Fevers, or violent Head aches etc. the Nose fell a Bleeding, the Fever abated and the pain evanished. And thence they (the Ancients) learned the use of Blooding. Now this is the very fault in Medicine and defect which Doctor Pitcairne would have mended and supplied, and which Mathematics only can supply. We see by our Pamphleteers confession, That the use of Blooding was first introduced because they observed that the loss of Blood was sometimes followed with recovery out of the Disease. To make us then able to order Blooding seasonably and to purpose, we must have made many observations on people's Blooding in all Diseases, cases and times of them, in all climates and in all the different circumstances and conditions in which it is possible for men's Bodies to be. Now this is not, nor ever shall or can be done; and therefore by this method of observing without Mathamatical discretion, Medicine shall be always a base mean conjectural Trade, fit only to be followed by such Jugglers as Tarugo and Kerkringius (this Kerkringius cannot read Latin, but his wife who is a School master's Daughter writes and copies for him, for the Fool will be in print) and by them called arsproestantissima and the noble Art, I suppose they mean of guessing and cheating, for it is no other as they practise it.  
But the Doctor has in his Oration and elsswhere proposed methods, by which Medicine shall or may be brought from the low and abject state of conjecture to a degree of certainty which can justly bear the Title of useful and therefore noble. Instead of thanking the Doctor for his proposal and for the progress he has made in the method proposed, Taruge tells us, pag, 18. That nothing can be more extravagant than to imagine that a speculative Science that goes all by demonstration can be of use in a practical Art founded on experience; and in which there are no infallible conclusions: but I tell him and the thing is evident, that we should have abundance of infallible conclusions in Medicine as to Cures as well as theory if Mathematics be used. For Tarugoes discourss implies no more than this. All that I Tarugo understand about Medicine is conjectural and I cannot make use of Mathematics, therefore they are not of use to me. But this does not hinder a speculative Science which goes by demonstration that is a Science that carries certainty with it, from being of use to bring a conjectural uncertain Art (as Tarugo and such like handle it) to a state of certainty, as we see the Mathematicians have done by Astronomy, Navigation. etc. and parts of Medicine that treat on the Eye, motion of the Members, motion of the Heart: And the cure of diseases by blooding. For though there neither are nor can be sufficient numbers of good Observations made, for ordering blooding. after the manner it was first introduced and which Tarugo contents himself with, yet a good Mathematician has discerned one good and exact observation (unknown to Tarugoes ancients, and indeed useless to Tarugo though he knew it, since he has not Mathematics enough to make the right use of it) from which he accuratly has deduced all that can be learned from any infinite number of such observations as Tarugo builds the Doctrine of blooding upon, and much more than Tarugo can understand. It is Laurentius Bellini who assumes no other Observation, nor any postulatum except the circulation of the blood, for to use his own words, doctrina mittendi sanguinem pendet ex toto a naturali ejus fluxu seu circuitu intra corpus. From the circulation observed by Dr William Harvey has Bellini taught when, where, and in what case or disease blood is to be let, and how much of it at a time, and what are the effects and consequences of letting blood. And all this he performs demonstratively, that is, he forms infallible conclusions in a practical Art and anent cures and diseases, by help of a speculative, that is, a certain and Mathematical one. And by this Bellini explains and confirms what Mr Newton in his preface says thus. Omnis Philosophiae (add etiam Medicinae quae Philosophiae pars est) difficuitas in eo versari videtur, ut a Phaens menis motuum investigemus vires naturae, deinde ab his viribus demonstremus Phaenomena reliqua. For Bellini has made use of the Phaenomina of the Blood's motion, to find what force and laws it had or observed, and having found these he investigats and deduces its effects when its passage is made free in one place than in another, that is, the Phaenomena of Blooding in any case or disease. And yet this Block head Tarugo has the face to say there are no infallible conclusions in Medicine. But he means it is like, Medicine as he understands and practices it.  
I come now to the page, 65. Where our Pamphleteer, to his own cost, teaches the World how absurd it is and foolish, to write anent matters that one understands not. He shows there (and over all his Pamphlet) that he comes to dissuade men from using in their trades as right methods as the Mathematicians have done, and in the mean time proves himself altogether ignorant of all Mathematics, or methods fit to be used for improving Medicine. The Doctor had in his first discourse explained aright the Nature (so to speak) or ratio of some diseases of the Eye that are of the greatest consequence, hitherto unknown to all the writers of Physic; and upon good ground had affirmed, that bodies swimming within the Cornea made no image on the Retina; (this he could have demonstrated, but it would hâve seemed, perhaps, very odd in an Inaugural Oration to propose Geometrical Arguments) Now, says our Pamphleteer, I Tarugo affirm the contrary. He may as well looking on any proposition demoustrated by Euclid or Archimedes, say, I affirm the contrary; for he'll. understand the demonstration of what the Doctor affirms, (and which is set down in a paper subjoined to this) as little as he does Arcihmedes' Works, or Dr Gregory's method of Quadratures.  
But it is perhaps pleasant to consider, what a noise he makes that he may be thought learned. He cries out on the Doctor, for not telling him what are the Laws of Refraction he speaks of and is very glad to be free of them; for it they had been set down, he would not have known what to have said of them. This is just such a shift as it would be to deny the truth of a proportion plainly flowing from the 47 of the first of Euclià, because the Demonstrator had not told what that 47 prop, contains, and so had not prom ulgated it. The universal Law of refraction is as well known as any proposition in Euclid, amongst Mathematicians; and since all the Science about the Eye is built upon this Law, what an able man in the Optics and in discovery of the defects in Vision is our Pamphleteer like to prove, while he is so grossly ignorant of it? He adventur's to say, pag. 66. That, of things on, or in the Cornea there is an Image made in the Retina if he tried it not, he is too bold to impose his bad Philosophy & vain conjecture on men of Sense; and if he tried it, he lies most abominably. For, besides experience, the demonstration after this set down, puts it out of question. That in the Retina or bottom of the Eye there is no image painted of any thing that is not without the Cornea, and consequently we have no Image of (that is, we do not see) these things that swim within the Cornea.  
Now let us see what a marvellous reasoner this Fellow is, that without skill in Mathematics is so bold as to meddle in them. He tells us, that if what is here demonstrated be true, than a man may see perfectly well through his Eye lids, or through a Millstone applied to the Cornea as the lids can he. For, says he (page, 66.) according to the Doctor, a thing so near the Cornea will make no impression on the Eye, and so no ways obstruct the sight: But the Doctor said and demonstrated, that a thing sufficiently nigh, or within the Cornea, makes no Image on the bottom of the Eye and is not seen. This fellow, by his foolish philosophy infers, O then it will not obstruct the sight. It will certainly if applied over all the Cornea, for by its opacity it hinders the rays to pass from other Bodies. But this he knew not, to wit, that the rays of the Sun do not easily pass through Millstones. Then he infers, that if what the Doctor says be true. Persons who have a Cataract growing in their Eyes, would not see Midges, as it were, that is, the Images of the little Bodies which float within the Cornea, and joining make up the Cataract. Here is a great instance of our Pamphleteers prying Judgement. The Doctor to show that in a Cataract there are no muscae obvolitantes & obver santes oculis, arising from the Images made on the Retina by Corpusculs floating within the Cornea, Taught, that Corpusculs so plac'd would imprint no Image: O then, says the Fool, there would be no Images of Midges before the Eyes of those in whom a Cataract is growing. It is indeed so, there are none; and Experience as well as Demonstration prove it to be as the Doctor affirmed long ago. Ye see how fundamentally he refures the Doctor: For, says he, if what the Doctor says (and demonstrates) be true, than the contrary is false. And who can help it?  
However, he makes a wonderful shift in the pages 67 and 68 to make a silly Reader believe he (the Pamphleteer) understood the matter he's treating of: for he very impudently comes off with laughing at an Axiom, the Doctor had adduced from the Optics. Let him laugh so long as he will, it is an Axiom, and admitted for such by all the Writers of Optics, and confirmed by constant experience; That from every point of a visible object (that is, an object illustrated and at a due distance from the eye) Rays of light come to all the parts of the Cornea. And therefore (said the Doctor) though some parts of the Cornea were covered with Opacous Bodies, the eye would see all the parts of the object. Now this I can let any person see, by putting Bodies not transparent on the Cornea of an eye, or by looking on the opack marks which some persons have on their Cornea; For they'll not hinder you from seeing the whole object, except the whole Cornea be covered with them. But says our Pamphleteer, If Rays fall on these opack Bodies laid to the Cornea, or on the Opack Corpusculs within it, will not these hinder the passage of those Rays? Yes certainly But in the mean time, other Rays from the same point of the object fall on all the other points (and some are not covered, but give a free passage) of the Cornea, or Aqueous humour; and by help of such Rays we see that point of the Object, as experience does teach us. And this also shows us the truth of the Optic maxim adduced by Doctor Pitcairne. But this fellow is impregnable against common sense.  
The pages 72 and 73, are taken up in letting us see; That he understands not one sentence of what the Doctor had said, nor of what can be said in this point; which he needed not have been at the pains to do, having so effectually done it before. And he very rightfully concludes, That the Doctor's Oration is stark Non sense; for indeed the Doctor is a Barbarian to our Pamphleteer, and not to be understood by a Fellow of so mean understanding.  
We come now to the page 76. Where our Pamphleteer falls a defying of Archimedes, who said, that if he were placed near the earth (not sustained by it) on a firm point, he could move the earth. This our Champion was not concerned in; but it seems, he would needs make himself famous by having defied Archimedes. Yet he shall be foiled by a lesser one than he. For it is demonstrated by the Writers of Mechanics, that any body howsoever great can be moved from its place or way, by any other though never so small, and never so slowly or weakly making impression on it, In medio minime resistente vel uniformi; and Mr Newton has demonstrated, that the earth and the rest of the planets are in such a Medium, and Archimedes knew the medium to be such. Archimedes then had reason, which our Pamphleteer should have learned of him, or of Mathematicians who are like him.  
We advance then to his page 77. where he says, that the Doctor's principal design in the discourse, de circulatione per vasa minima, was to explain how Secretion is made in men's Bodies: Which is false. For his great design there was to refute two opinions anent that affair, which are very much talked of where he than was; But this he could not do without explaining Secretion as to some of its properties: for neither he, nor any man else has yet explained all of them publicly. But let us see what he says, page 79, & 80. There he very bravely affirms, that some bodies, though every way less than the hole they are offered to, yet will not pass through that hole. Which is a further testimony of his impudent stupidity: He had before told us of Two screw-nails equal, but contrary ways turned, which will not enter the one where the other does. This Blockhead does not understand what the Doctor had taught, to wit, that these two Nails are not figurae similiter positae, and that as the one is offered, it is not of an equal Diameter with the other as it is proposed to the passage. I am convinced now, that this Fellow knows not what a Diameter is: else he would not, I think, with all his impudence deny, that a body whose sides every way are nearer to one another, than are to one another the sides of a certain hole, may enter that hole; or, that a body whose greatest extent is lest than the least extent of a hole, may enter and past through it: for thus I have worded the Doctor's proposition, that I might not terrify our Pamphleteer with Diameters that he understands so little; for it's plain, that what is less than the least Diameter of an orifice can be contained in it, since the Diameter is contained in it, and so I leave him to speak nonsense about his Screws, while I in a few words deliver the substance of what the Doctor alleges; and then I shall leave it to the Reader to judge if he had reason on his side. All the Secretions that are made in our bodies are liquid, and liquors; and all liquors can accommodate themselves to the figure of any vessel; whatsoever be the figure of the parts of the fluid or liquors, yet the liquor itself yields to the figure of its vessel. And if any liquor by reason of its viscousnes does not readily enter a small orifice, when the force impelling it is not able to divide it into smaller portions, that liquor is excluded, not by reason of its figure, but because it is too great a portion of parts, (in respect of the impelling force) coherent. Now this is a demonstration of the usefulness of the diversity of Figures in pores or Secretory vessels; and no more was needful to convince men of their error in this affair. But this is passed over by our Champion, because it was too plain, and gave him no room to play with his Screws.  
therefore we must follow him to the page 84. The Doctor had demonstrated, that a solid carried in a liquor, and driven by its current to an orifice, (not circular) if its Diameter be every way smaller than the smallest of the orifice, than it would enter and pass though it were of never so different a figure from the orifice: But if it be otherways, the Doctor did demonstrat that there would be an infinite number of turns and times in which it could not pass, for one in which it might, that is to say, (for I see our Pamphleteer has aspight at any way of expression which forces him to understand what he reads) in all eternity it would pass at most but once. To this our Champion Answers; O than it may pass, and that is enough to spoil the demonstration. And indeed it was enough for him to make this Answer to a demonstration he understood nothing of. He falls (after this shortand substantious Answer) upon a Rope-dancer, and compares him with a corpuscule carried by the current: And because the Rope dancer can balance himself and do many things as the lists, he wisely concludes, that an inanimat particle carried down by an unthinking liquor, can do the like, and balance itself so as to be in the wished for situation, just when it is at theentry of a canal. This might have passed when Trees spoke. But I must here againt put you in mind of the necessity and usefulness of that advice the Doctor gave, to beware of the Sects of Philosophy. Our Pamphleteer needed this advice more than any man alive: For his whole Pamphlet (except where he plays the Comedian) is an insignificant discourse buil on the silly opinions and falsehoods taught by some sects of Philosophy. And in this place he manfully attempts to spoil a Demonstration, by supposing, forsooth, that every part of our Blood is a rational and thinking Rope-dancer, he should have added, and a Comedian too.  
Let us go on to his 88 page. The Doctor had concluded, that either there would be no Secretion, or entry of small-bodies into the secretory vessels, or, the particles must change the orifice to a circular figure, since no other figure could give them entry more than once in an infinite time. Now let us here what answer our Champion makes. There is not (says he) the least shadow of probability, that pores will become circular by corpusculs of different figures striving to enter, and forcing their way: for a Cube applying itself to a square orifice will never make the orifice round, for it cannot enter, and will summer be made round than the poor The Doctor and demonstrated first, that the corpusculs of different figures, and not having all their Diameters less than the least one of the orifice, would not enter. And there our Champion very gravely (but without reason) pronounce, that they might enter, notwithstanding of what was said. In the next place; The Doctor told, that if they should enter, then they'd make the Orifice round. Hold, says the Champion, they cannot enter at all. And indeed, he is in the right on't, for they'll not enter in ones life-time, and what then becomes of Secretion managed by diversity of Pores? It is strange tho, to see the dice so much at this fellow's command, that they are in what humour he pleases of entering or not entering.  
But it is very pleasant to see, how gingerly he passes over the Doctor's Demonstration of the Orifices of all our Vessels being Circular. The Demonstration is shortly this. All Liquors running through a Canal whose sides are membranous, & easily yield (though at first the Orifice of it be not circular-ways disposed) do equally on all sides tend from the Centre to the Circumference, and consequently extend the containing Membrane equally on all sides; and so its Orifice becomes Circular, since a Circle is nothing else but a figure, whose sides every where are equally distant from a point within them, which we call the Centre. What do you think is his answer? Forsooth, Sir, it is a question. How comes it then to pass, says he, page 90, That the Valvuls at the Heart, and the Wula are not worn away? And why has not the Air made our Nostrils round ere now? I cannot guests, what propose it serves for to speak of the Valvuls and Wula's being not worn away, unless it be to prove that he'll always have something to say, though never so little to the purpose; for here the Doctor is speaking only of extending thin membranous Orifices: And it is very plain that the Valvuls by the force of the entering Blood are applied to the sides of tha Arteries ex. gr. and consequently become circular, as every section of the Artery is. As to our Nostrils; Our Pamphleteer for the favour I have done him in answering his first question, is to prove that our Nostrils are thin and very yielding Membranes, just as the capillary Vessels are; Yea as thin and yielding in respect of of the Air, as the capillary Vessels are in respect of the Blood; and here we have prescinded from the impetus that the Blood has from the Heart, the like whereof the Air has not.  
Our Champion finding, that in spite of his Answers & questions, too the diversity of Pores would fall; is resolved (page 92) to comply, but is not able to overcome that great difficulty, (great to Block heads and Dunces) How it comes, that either Urine does not pass with the Bile, if the passage for the Bile be greater than that for the Urine, or that the Bile does not go alongst with the Urine, if the passage for this be widest? Now this is answered already by the Doctor in't he 18 paragraph of his discourse de circulatione per vasaminima: But this man understood it not, though the account of the Phaenomenon there given be very plain. Yet to please him, I'll let him make the passage for the Bile wider than that for the Urine, (though it he make it narrower, it will not avail him) O then, says he, All the Urine will go through the Liver to the Intestines. Yovare hugely in the wrong, Sir, with your Metaphysics. For, to tell you in plain Scotch, what you could not understand when the Doctor told it in plain Lain; There is no sincere and homogeneous Secretion in the Body of Man: And the Bile when it is secerned in the Liver, has driven alongst with it some parts of Urine, and some parts like those secerned in many other places. For when the Blood comes at the same time by different portions to the Liver and Kidneys, it is plain, that there will pass through the Kidneys all that can pass, (in which company there will be a little Bile, if the passage there be narrower than in the Liver) and in the Liver at the same time, out o fthe blood that comes thither will be secerned whatever is loose and receavalbe by the passage of the Bile: and here we'll find some part of Urine (which, because the Bile flows slowly, and for the most part stagnats in its secretory vessels, unites by time with the fat like parts of the Bile) and other excretions too; all which joined together make what commonly is called Bile. Now, there is no fear that all the Urine come this way, for the Bile must come this way (since to please our Pamphleteer, we have made the passage in the Kidneys too narrow for the Bile) and the Urine has sufficient passage in the Kidneys to transmit the greatest part of it; the passges through the Liver being too few for both. But there are other reasons that can be brought, were it not a folly to cast a Pearl before such a beast as this is, that understands nothing except to kick. For it was not the Doctor's design to explain every Secretion in the Body, but only secretion in general, that is, some properties common to all Secretions; such as, that all secretion is done without any Ferment, and all secretion is performed in pores of a circular figure. But the particular secretions depend upon something besides, better known to Doctor Pitciarne than to Tarugo.  
It is time now to follow him to the page 97, 98, and 99, where he is Angry (or not pleased) with the Doctor, for saying, that Mercury (the Doctor is speaking of common quick silver) acts in our Bodies by its weight C, then, says the Pamphleteer, Gold would raise a Salivation, and cure the French. Pox better than Mercury; which, says he, the meanest Surgeon knows to be self. Here is a mighty instance of the ignorance of this Fellow. The Doctor had said, that if Gold were as fluid as Mercuty, it would do greater Feats. And this is the same as to have said, that Mercury would do greater fears than it now does, if it were heavier or as heavy as gold Now, which the Surgeons that are the Pamphleteers friends has told him, that Gold reduced to a state of fluidity, like Mercury, would not cure the French Pox; I cannot tell this I know, it would be kindly done in a Surgeon to tell him how to write a Receipt or bill for his patient, but he has yet a quarrel with the Doctor, for saying, that baths wrought only by their weight on our bodies. He adduces Bellini's authority to prove that they work otherways than by their weight, since Bellini thinks it probable that they penetrate through the Skin to the liquors, etc. But pray good Tarugo does Bellini says that they penetrate by any other force than their weight? It is their weight that produces the effects attributed to them, and it is the outward pressure that (as an effect of weight) is the most certain operation of Baths. The effects that may be produced by penetrating, are not so certain; the penetration being more dubious thatn the pressure though both are the effect of weight. But these things are too clear.  
And I therefore pass to the page 102: which, and to the page 110, he spends, as he would have one think. In refuting what the Doctor advances in a Discourse about Respiration. But he touches not, nor medles with any thing said thereanent. Only in the page 105. He leaps to another Discourse, in which the Doctor en passant had Answered an Objection made against his Opinion about Respiration, some time after it had been printed. The Objection was How it comes to pass, That if a Whelp ex. gr. once breath, and then be stopped from breathing before the old Canals (through which much of the blood passed before breathing) be stopped, yet will die in a little time. The Doctor gives two answers to it. The first made it plain (from what he had proven in his the Respiratione) that the expanded Air stopped the passage of the Lungs, which had never been stopped before, the whole Blood never having passed thro' the old Canals without touching at the Lungs: And so the Whelp must in a little time die; a part of the Blood being stopped in the right Ventricle of the Heart. Here our Champion first makes a great noise, by calling this a lame Demonstration whereas the Block head might have seen that it is an answer to an Objection. But he had been so harrasied with Demonstrations, & put by them to such pitiful shifts, that the Terror of them was not gone; and therefore when he fell into a place where the Doctor was giving out his Answers, he took them for Demonstrations too. Next, he cries out that a Clown may laugh at the Doctor who says, That though the old Canals be open, yet the Blood will not all go that way, because it never all went that way. Now this Fellow lies. For the Dotor had said, That the Blood could not all go thro' the old Canals; and this, I think, is a reason for its not going all thro' them. The old Canals are not capacious enough to give passage to the whole Blood, so as to mautain the necessary Circulation, and Life depending on it. That this Fellow lies on the Doctor it appears both from what he translates out of the Doctor's Answer, in the beginning of the the page 105, and from what he acknowledges in the two last lines, page 106, and the two first of page 107. But he was necessitated to make a Lie, for else he had nothing at all to say. Yet after he has acknowledged himself to have lied, and that the Doctor had told plainly, That the Blood could not all pass thro' the old Canals, but some of it at every Systole Cordis would be left in the right Ventricle of the Heart; he very Magisterially says, Let it even step on slowly, and take the more time, and it will come to its journey's end before night. This Fellow's business here was to prove, That all the Blood could pass thro' the old Canals. Instead of doing this, he gives in his word for it, that it will all pass, but slowly. But he Lies so often, that I am not resolved to take any thing upon his bare Authority. In the mean time, I'll advertise him, that in a very few Systoles the right Ventricle of the Heart will be so filled with Blood (which should have passed thro' the Lungs, and cannot yet pass thro' the old Canals timeously) that no more Blood can be receiv'dd into that Ventricle; And so the Circulation ceases at the Fountain. But after our Champion had acknowledged that he had lied, finding no advantage against the Doctor by being ingenuous, he Reputes himsef, and falls back into his former Lie, and through almost two pages makes a fine Dialogue with a Child, (It would seem to have been his Trade) founded on nothing but his own Lye.  
He comes next page 111, To cavil at the account given by the Doctor of one Thunderstroke some years ago, whose Lungs were clapped together in an extraordinary manner and degree: This is matter of fact. Here our Champion cries out against the Doctor for having faid, That the Lungs too much blown up with Air, hinder the Circulation throw themselves; And yet now, says he, he makes their not being blown at all to stop that same Circulation. If he had any sense or ingenuity he'd see both to be true. If the Lungs be too much blown, the Blood-vessells are too much straitened: If they are entirely flaccid, there wants the weight of the Air, and elasticity to squeeze the blood by turns into the left Ventricle of the Heart, and so it cannot pass sufficiently in One (whose old Canals are stopped) to entertain Life: Now, it when One is putting forth the Air out of his Lungs it shall happen (as it happened to the Person killed by the Thunder) that the Air is ratified, and so made much and suddenly lighter, It will come to pass That first, a small part of that mass of Air which he put forth will return to the Lungs, because a small part now takes up the room of the whole; And therefore, there will be wanting that weight which the whole mass before exerted for continuing the Circulation thro' the Lungs: And Secondly, The Man must die, if the Air continue in this state of rare fraction made by the Lightning, longer than he can live without Air, as the event showed it had done in this Man's case And here we have a new proof of the hurt that Metaphysics do in Reasoning; For our Champion by virtue of them has found out, That in Liquors the parts by rare fraction grow less than before; Whereas, says he, they might indeed grow larger, if they were like the parts of brass or malleable matter. Now every body knows that the portions of Air are Elastic, and that when they are liberated rated from compression, they like wool (for to this they are by Mr. roil and others likened) exolve and expand themselves without having their parts made Lesser, but only by having some of them removed farther from some others than before, and so acquire a greater superfice, or volume. But out Champion must be excused for his mistake; for the metaphysics make no mention of Elastic Fluids. Before I leave him, I must take notice how he wrists and mangles the Doctor's words. The Doctor had said, That (in the case of him that was killed with Thunder) The air being suddenly and much expanded (the air which environed the Man) could not blow up the Lungs, its weight being diminished, neither could it enter, its superfice being enlarged. And this fellow makes the Doctor say. That the particles of the Air become larger and lighter. Now his Metaphysics would not have furnished him with any quibble against the Airs growing lighter and more expanded; but he had a quibble about parts growing lesser, which I leave him to pursue: Only, since the Air may be expanded, and any portion of it fill a larger space; I would know, if then its parts do not proportionally grow larger? For, Totum faciunt parts I come now to his page. 117.  
In this and some following pages he makes all the use he can of his Art Metaphisical, which seems to be the same with Lullius', that is, the Art of raving and prattling of things he knows nothing of at all.  
The Doctor in a discourse had made it manifest, That no ferment in the Stomach dissolves our meats. This was his main design; and his reason was, that the same Ferment would dissolve our Stomaches and Guts. In place of this Ferment he substituted the attrition that the meat suffers in the stomach, by the which its parts are separated, after that by the heat of the Environing parts and moisture, it is made tender and easy to be divided into small particles He rejected therefore Doctor Lister's Opinion, not as false, but in so far as he attributed too much to Putrification; and because it is plain, that the efficient cause (which is mainly required) is the stomach (helped by other parts) by its motion. But because the Doctor knew it would be objected, that the same attrition might wear off parts of the stomach, he thought fit to furnish his Reader with an Answer to it, taken out of many that could be made, and it is this; that the same parts and sides of a bit of meat are exposed to the action of the stomach, whereas this action is not performed by the same parts of the stomach, but by divers parts of it applied one after another. This Answer the Pamphleteer takes no notice off; for he had nothing to say against it. Now, it is plain, that the serment is applied always to the same part of the stomach, especially it being derived from the blood in Glanduls which contain it, and furnish the stomach with it: For I make use of the word Glandule, to please and comply with the Adversaries.  
We are then to consider what the Pamphleter says pag 124. There he is very angry at the Doctor for saying, That the Circulation of the Blood is the ground and foundation of all Medicine. For besides that One might infer from it. That a good friend of the Pamphleteers knew nothing of Medicine, because when he was examined, he told very gravely, as one who believes what he says, That the blood went out by the Veins from the Heart, and returned to it by Arteries from all parts of the Body; I say, besides this, it spoils his pretences of being a learned Physician by reading scraps of Hippocrate and Galen, who were ignorant of it; as the Doctor has proved beyond any possibility of being refuted. But there is great reason of suspecting that the Pamphleteer himself does not understand the Circulation, and then he had but reason to be angry with the Doctor for extolling it so far. In the same page the Pamphleteer endeavours to show that the Circulation is not the ground of Medicine, since after its invention Physicians practise after the old method, by Derivations, Revulsions, and Bloodings at different parts of the Body. Where he means (else he speaks arrant nonsense) that Derivations etc. are inconsistent with the Circulation; Which proves him ignorant of the Circulation altogether, for these agree exactly,  
Let him to this purpose read the sixth prop of Bellini de Missione Sanguinis. But since he understands not Mathematics, he'll not understand the demonstration of that proposition.  
In the pag 125. He shows himself a notable Disputant. For the Doctor had taught, That if any obstruction should happen in the Conduits, it would, ceteris paribus, more readily happen in the Arteries than in the Veins, &c because the blood, which carries the causes of obstructions, runs from the wider towards the narrower part of the Artery; so that the sides of the Arteries do oppose the motion of the blood, the contrary whereof happens in the Veins: And the thing that could make an Obstruction in a Vein, must make it first an Artery; for it must first by the law of the Circulation come to the smallest part of the Artery and pass it, before it can come to stop in the Vein. Now, the Artery being as small (or smallet) as the Vein, if it could obstruct the last, it must obstruct the first. The Pamphleteer finds here a brave way to escape, and raise, as he thought, a great disput. The sides, says he, of the Arteries are yielding, and so cannot support the ends or Arches, as it were, of the obstructing Body. But are not the sides of the Arteries as stiff as the sides of the Veins, etc. But it is to be remarked, that obstructions happen in the places where the motion of the Blood is slowest, and where there is very little dilatation of the Arteries; so that all our Pamphleteer's quibles serve to no purpose, unless to prove, That the is no obstruction at all: For the Doctor in the 22 paragraph of that Discourse shows, That the Obstructing of Viscous sticking matter is to be found rather in the Arteriae Evanescentes than in the Veins: Now, the Arteriae Evanescentes retain nothing of an Artery. save the figure. This was told by the Doctor in that paragraph in mathematical terms, that the thing might be less subject to ambiguity, and the more comprehensively expressed. AEqualis est velocitas in evanescente Arteria & nascente Vena, said the Doctor; and therefore no more motion in the One than in the Other. This is manifest, by the Vein's being a continued conduit with the Artery, as the Doctor proved, and Microscopes let us see. And thus our Quibler's pitiful shifts are discovered; which depend upon gross ignorance of Anatomy and Mathematics, and every thing that is accurately expressed, that is, put in a Mathematical form of words.  
Let us now come up to his page 129. The Doctor had taught that Willis and Silvius, and a great many others were in the wrong to place the cause of Apoplexies, &c, In the Nerves, since by what is said in that discourse de Circulatione in Genitis & non Genitis, the said cause must principally be found in the Arteries. And because the Doctor knew it was the common doctrine of the place he then was in, That Apoplexies were produced sometimes by a Coagulation of the Blood, in which case they reckoned that Rupturs and Extravasations followed; and sometimes (this was the opinion of Syllvius a man famous there) by a kind of Coagulation of the spirits, by the force or infection of Opium or other bodies having the like quality. Now in this case they reckoned no extravasations of Blood, since the fault is in the Spirits and not in the Blood. The Doctor made no doubt of the truth of what is alleged in the first place; since observations teach, that Apoplexies often fall out by the Coagulation of the Blood in the Arteries, and consequently its extravasation: And therefore he speaks nothing of it, but in general that whatever it be, it must make the first obstruction in the Arteries. And then he falls to examine the second opinion, anent Apoplexie's being produced by the immobility and Coagulation of the Animal Spirits; which Willis tollowed too. To do this aright, he explains the way of Opiums working; which is not by killing or coagulating the Spirits: But by rarifying the blood, which compresses the Nerves in the head where there is least resistance. Now, this is so manifest, that there is no rarifier of the blood of any force, that is, no efficacious sudorific, that does not bring sleep on the Person that is put a sweeting. Here our Pamphleteer objects; that then, Spirit of Hart-horn &c: And such like rarifiers of the Blood, would bring men into Apoplexies, which nevertheless cure that disease. This fellow has never seen an Apoplexy that talks of curing it by the rarifying force of Spirit of Hart-horn and the like. The Volatile Salts and Spirits given in good quantities to Apoplectic persons, work neither by their rarifying quality, nor by their coagulating one, but by their stimulating and irritating force (as the Doctor taught us when he treated about Apoplexy) or the force and power they have of raising pain: For it's plain, that the foam of Vinegar from a red hot-iron has as much virtue to recover one from an Apoplectic fit, as the spirit of Hart-horn, though Vinegar be no great rarifier of the blood. As for giving the spirit of Hart-horn or volatile Salts inwardly, (a thing not to be done in the fit of an Apoplexy) If they be given in a good and sufficient quantity, they'll bring ease of pain, and sleep, just as doth Opium, which I desire our Pamphleteer to learn, But it is not possible to see such effects of the Volatile Spirit or Salts, if they be given by one gut or grain for a Dose, as he and his learned friend do order them. Now I leave it to a discreet Reader to judge, what an excellent argument this of the Pamphleteer is against the Doctor. If (says the Pamphleteer page 130) Wine or any thing that rarefies the Blood bring a fit of an Apoplexy, than another Dose of the same will cure you of the fit. I leave this cure to his Friend and Comatade. But I proceed.  
The Doctor teaches; That every thing which rarefies the blood so much, that the Arteries in the Brain containing it, are dilated to a degree sufficient for compressing the Nerves there, and so hindering the Efflux of Spirits, will bring Sleep; and perhaps a fit of sleepy Disease. Now this is evident.  
O but, says our Pamphleteer, Then all Sudorisicks etc. will make us sleep. And I tell him, they'll certainly do so, when either their quantity or force is such as to produce a dilatation of the Arteries sufficient to compress the Nerves in the Brain.  
What he says farther in this affair, is arrant nonsense; as is what he talks about the Heart's having an Antagonist Muscle, than which nothing could have been said so contrary to Anatomy, and so proper to make our Pamphleteer's gross Ignorance appear to the meanest Apprentice. The Doctor had taught, That the reason of the Heart's motion not ceasing was, that the Heart had not an opposite Muscle: For at all times all the Muscles have an equal quantity of Spirits flowing to them, and keeping them in Aequilibrio; else one Muscle would move the Member, while the other being destitute of Spirits to blow it and contract it, remained idle and useless. Now if Muscles for bowing the Arm ex gr. prevail, it is because they have, over and above the quantity of Spirits and Blood which they got to keep them in balance with those Muscles which serve to hindet it from bowing, a new quantity sent to cast the balance, and to make the contraction stronger on their side. Now, the Heart having no Muscle to act against it, or to how a Member to the contrary side, needs fewer Spirits and Nerves less free from compression; and so can be in motion when other Muscles are not, which require a quantity of Spirits to overcome the quantity of their opposite Muscles, over and above what is requisite to keep them in Aequilibrio, Whereas the Heart requires no more than what would keep in Aequilibrio with its opposite, if it had any; and much less. To this our Pamphleteer Answers, That though the Heart has not an opposite or Antagonist Muscle, yet it has first, the Motus Restitutionis to surmount; and so have all Muscles, Sir, (and this is our Pamphleteers depth of Anatomy) as much as the Heart. Next, says he, it has the Blood to squirt out, and no small force is requisite to that. And, Sir, other Muscles have a heavy bone to lift up, a Leg or Arm; and no small force is requisite to this; Yea over and above, they have the force of a contrary and equal Muscle to overcome, which the Heart is not encumbered with. And this is the shallowness of our Pamphleteer, who has all along spoke nonsense, because he did not understand what it is to have or want an opposite or Antagonist Muscle Yet he would needs quibble about it, that he might seem to understand it. He has had the like impudence over all the Pamphlet in meddling with Mathematics of which he is most grossly Ignorant; so monstruously Ignorant, that he (page 85) brings in Bodies, some Triangular, some Square, etc. All which are Impossibilities, but Demonstrations of the Fellows intolerable Ignorance in an affair in which he pretended to give Judgement. I refer him therefore to his Studies, and to the Mathematick-Professor, who can teach him (if teachable) as much Geometry as will serve to let him see that the Muscles which dilate the Breast are stronger than these which constrict it; And that the Muscles which he has mustered up as constrictors of it perform a very different office, whatever Galen has said to the contrary:  
FINIS.