observed, sports and varies very surprizingly in its Leaves: This latter, I take to be genuine _Tea_; whereas, I am of Opinion, that the former, resembling the _Spiræa_, is spurious. Since, therefore, both _Tartary_ and _China_, abound with the _Pyrola_, and the _Spiræa_ of _Theophrastus_, I think we have just Reason to conclude, that all the Leaves sold among us for _Tea_, have not been gathered from one Species of Shrub, or Herb, but are adulterated with those of the _Pyrola_, the _Spiræa_, or some other Shrub; among which, we may justly reckon the _Rhus_, or _Sumach_, on account of the Similarity of its Leaves, Flowers, Taste, and Bulk; though I am sensible, that the celebrated _Bauhine_, in his _Pinax_, has placed it among the Species of _Agnus Castus_, and made it a Kind of intermediate Plant, between the _Vitex_ and _Ligustrum_, calling it Frutex _Spicatus Foliis Salignis serratis_. In consequence of this, it seems dubious to what Kind of Shrubs it is principally to be referred: Its Flowers grow in a spicated Order, on the Tops of the Twigs, like those of the _Agnus Castus_; so that the _Spiræa_ very much resembles the _Vitex_: But, when the Flowers, and crenated Leaves of the _Spiræa_, are accurately viewed, we find, that it is more justly referred to the _Rhus_, or _Sumach_, than to any other Species of Shrub. As neither _Theophrastus_, _Clusius_, nor _Bodæus a Stapelen_, have mentioned its Virtues, I shall not assert that they agree exactly with these of the _Chinese Tea_; only, it is highly probable, that the _Chinese Tea_ is adulterated with the _Spiræa_, either by the _Asiatic_ or _European_ Dealers. Avarice has not only prompted People to this Piece of Fraud, but also to lodge _Tobacco_ in Office-Houses, in order to render it more acrid. In order to evince how like the _Chinese_, or _Japonese Tea_ is to the _Spiræa_, I refer the Reader to _Tab. 1. Fig. 6, & 7_, the former of which is a Leaf of _Tea_, and the latter that of the _Spiræa_. Happening one Day to visit _Hieronymus Molmanus_, a learned Jesuit, to whom I communicated my Paradox about _Tea_; that Gentleman, upon my commending _Trigautius_ and _Rhodius_, ordered me to read _Martini Martinii novus Atlas Sinensis_, as the best and latest Account of the _East Indies_, or rather of _China_. When I found this Work, I was glad to meet with a Description of the _Cha_, in the Account of the Town _Hojechu_ in _Nanquin_, in which the Author affirms, that it is no where better and more valuable. _Martinius_ informs us, that the _Chinese Tea_ belongs to the _Rhus_, and is highly similar to it: But this _Rhus_, as I have already shewn from _Pliny_, _Clusius_, _Dodonæus_, and _Dalechampius_, is the same with our _Chamelæagnus_. Hence, it is not only obvious in itself, but confirmed by the Authority of _Martinius_, that the _Chinese_ are guilty of Fraud and Imposture in adulterating their _Tea_.