Relates the history of two traytors, _Edric_ the father, and _Edric_ the son, who lived near 800 years ago; from which he collects and concludes with this lesson to princes, that they ought to be cautious whom they trust, and to pry with piercing eyes into the conduct of their ministers, and the motives of their counsels. _An Extract of a Discourse made to the ~Royal Society~, in Defence of Mr. ~Cheselden~’s intended Operation on the Ear of a condemn’d Malefactor._ Daily Courant. _Jan. 17._ The author first observes, that the skin, commonly call’d, _The Drum of the Ear_, is not the organ of hearing, as was vulgarly thought; for the proof of which he offers a great number of reasons and observations of his own, as well as the opinions and reasons of the most learned and judicious anatomists. He then observes, there are two passages to the organs of hearing; one by the outward ear, the other thro’ the back part of the mouth, thro’ which some people can hear, who cannot hear thro’ the outward ear. In this case he supposes the sound may be interrupted by the drum of the ear, which is seated in this passage, and being diseased, may hinder sounds from passing to the internal parts, where are seated the proper organs of hearing: In this case only, he supposes, that perforating the drum may prove a remedy for deafness, as depressing the chrystalline humour of the eye (vulgarly call’d couching a cataract) is daily found to be a remedy for blindness; and yet that operation has been as indecently and ignorantly ridicul’d as the experiment of Mr. _Cheselden_’s; one writer against that operation not scrupling to give his book the following title, _A new method of recovering the sight by putting out the eye_. He also deserves, that the scituation of the drum is such, that the operation may be easily made by a skilful person; and it being a very thin skin, he presumes it will not be very painful; and if so, the person who is to undergo the experiment will purchase his life upon very easy terms: But supposing it should be very painful; (which ’tis hop’d it will not be) on whom can the first experiment be so fitly made, for the service of mankind, as on one whose life is already forfeited to the publick? [See page 10. Col. 2] _Read’s Weekly Journal_, Jan. 16.