gratifying our Curiosities; and next by exciting and cherishing our Devotion.* Boyle’s Experimental Philosophy, p. 3.
Mr Sandford’s ideas on natural history were rather confused, and his powers of description evidently bothered by the astonishing “insect” which had so annoyed his son. What a pity so curious a specimen was not preserved for the benefit of Moore and “the good of others”! There was now a sore battle being fought between the quacks and the regular practitioners, the latter being bound to come forward and defend what they considered to be their rights by all and every means. That they did not disdain the use of advertisements, the following, which had its origin in a small gossiping paragraph, shows. It appears in the Daily Journal of July 22, 1734, but was originally published a few days before, without the two paragraphs after signature:—