encounter and that the fruits which Antiquity hath believed to be mixt bodies and those composed from a concurrence of four Elements are materially of one onely Element also that those three Elements are naturally cold nor that native heat is any where in things except from Light Life Motion and an altering Blas In like manner that all actual moisture is of Water but all virtual moisture from the property of the seeds Likewise that dryness is by it self in the Air and Earth but in Fruits by reason of the Seeds and Coagulations and that there are not Contraries in Nature To give you my opinion hereof first I think it too great a presumption in any man to feign himself so much above the rest as to accuse all others of ignorance and that none but he alone hath the true knowledg of all things as infallible and undeniable and that so many Learned Wise and Ingenious Men in so many ages have been blinded with errors for certainly no particular Creature in Nature can have any exact or perfect knowledg of Natural things and therefore opinions cannot be infallible truths although they may seem probable for how is it possible that a single finite Creature should know the numberless varieties and hidden actions of Nature Wherefore your Author cannot say that he hath demonstrated any thing which could not be as much contradicted and perhaps with more reason then he hath brought proofs and demonstrations And thus when he speaks of Elements that there are not four in Nature and that they cannot go together or encounter it may be his opinion but others have brought as many reasons to the contrary and I think with more probability so as it is unnecessary to make a tedious discourse thereof and therefore I 'le refer you to those that have treated of it more learnedly and solidly then I can do But I perceive your Author is much for Art and since he can make solid bodies liquid and liquid bodies solid he believes that all bodies are composed out of the Element of Water and that Water therefore is the first Principle of all things when as Water in my opinion is but an Effect as all other natural Creatures and therefore cannot be a cause or principle of them Concerning the Natural coldness of Water Air and Earth it may be or not be so for any thing your Author can truly know but to my sense and reason it seems probable that there are things naturally hot and moist and hot and dry as well as cold and moist and cold and dry But all these are but several effects produced by the several actions of Natural Matter which Natural Matter is the onely Principle of all Natural Effects and Creatures whatever and this Principle I am confident your Author can no more prove to be Water then he can prove that Heat Light Life Motion and Blas are not material Concerning what he saith That Native Heat is no where in things except from Light Life Motion and an altering Blas I believe that motion of life makes not onely heat but all effects whatsoever but this native heat is not produced onely from the motions of Particular lives in particular Creatures but it is made by the motions of Natures life which life in all probability is the self-moving Matter which no doubt can and doth make Light and Blas without Heat and Heat without Light or Blas Wherefore Light and Blas are not principles of native Heat no more then native Heat is the principle of Light and Blas Neither is Water the Principle of Actual moisture nor the propriety of seeds the Principle of all Virtual moisture but self-moving Matter is the Principle of all and makes both actual and virtual moisture and there is no question but there are many sorts of moistures As for Dryness which he says is by it self in the Air and Earth and in Fruits by reason of the Seeds and Coagulations I cannot conceive how any thing can be by it self in Nature by reason there is nothing alone and single in Nature but all are inseparable parts of one body perchance he means it is naturally and essentially inherent in Air and Earth but neither can that be in my reason because all Creatures and Effects of Nature are Intermixt and there is as much dryness in other Creatures as in Air and Earth Lastly as for his opinion That there are no Contraries in Nature I believe not in the essence or nature of Matter but sense and reason inform us that there are Contraries in Natures actions which are Corporeal motions which cause mixtures qualities degrees discords as also harmonious conjunctions and concords compositions divisions and the like effects whatsoever But though your Author seems to be an enemy to the mixtures of Elements yet he makes such a mixture of Divinity and natural Philosophy that all his Philosophy is nothing but a meer Hotch-potch spoiling one with the other And so I will leave it to those that delight in it resting MADAM Your faithful Friend and Servant IV. MADAM WAter according to your Authors opinion is frozen into Snow Ice or Hail not by Cold but by its own Gas But since I am not able to conceive what his Gas is being a term invented by himself I will briefly declare my own opinion which is That Snow Ice and Hail in my judgment are made in the like manner as Passions or Colours are made and raised in Man for a sad discourse or a cruel object will make a Man pale and cold and a fearful object will make him tremble whereas a wanton and obscene discourse will make some red and hot But yet these discourses and objects are onely external occasional and not immediate efficient causes of such alterations Also when a Man eats or drinks any thing that is actually hot or cold or enters into a cold or hot room bath or air he becomes hot or cold by the actions of those external agents that work upon him or rather whose motions the sensitive motions of his body do pattern out The like for diseases for they may be caused either by hearing ill reports or by taking either hurtful or superfluous food into the Body or by Infections inwardly or outwardly and many other ways Likewise may Colours be made different ways And so may Snow Ice and Hail for all loose rare and porous Bodies are more apt to alter and change then close solid and dense bodies and not onely to change from what they are but to rechange to what they were But Madam many studious persons study Nature more in her own substance then in her various actions which is the cause they arrive to no knowledg of Natures Works for the same parts of Matter may act or work several ways Like as a Man or other animal creature may put one part of his body into various and several postures and move it many different ways Your Author may say that although several Creatures may be
out the object of sent besides the nose but those are interior parts and take their patterns from the nose as the organ properly designed for it neither is their resentment the same because their motions are not alike for the stomack may perceive and pattern out a sent with aversion when the nose may pattern it out with pleasure And thus much also of Sent I conclude and rest MADAM Your faithful Friend and Servant XXIX MADAM COncerning your Learned Authors discourse of Density and Rality he defines Thick to be that which takes up more parts of a space given and thin which containes fewer parts of the same magnitude not that there is more matter in one place then in an other equal place but a greater quantity of some named body wherefore the multitude and paucity of the parts contained within the same space do constitute density and rarity Where of my opinion is That there is no more nor less space or place then body according to its ' dilation or contraction and that space and place are dilated and contracted with the body according to the magnitude of the body for body place and magnitude are the same thing only place is in regard of the several parts of the body and there is as well space betwixt things distant a hairs breadth from one another as betwixt things distant a million of miles but yet this space is nothing from the body but it makes that that body has not the same place with this body that is that this body is not that body and that this bodies place is not that bodies place Next your Author sayes He hath already clearly enough demonstrated that there can be no beginning of motion but from an external and moved body and that heavy bodies being once cast upwards cannot be cast down again but by external motion Truly Madam I will not speak of your Authors demonstrations for it is done most by art which I have no knowledg in but I think I have probably declared that all the actions of nature are not forced by one part driving pressing or shoving another as a man doth a wheel-barrow or a whip a horse nor by reactions as if men were at foot-ball or cuffs or as men with carts meeting each other in a narrow lane But to prove there is no self-motion in nature he goes on and says To attribute to created bodies the power to move themselves what is it else then to say that there be creatures which have no dependance upon the Creator To which I answer That if man who is but a single part of nature hath given him by God the power and a free will of moving himself why should not God give it to Nature Neither can I see how it can take off the dependance upon God more then Eternity for if there be an Eternal Creator there is also an Eternal Creature and if an Eternal Master an Eternal Servant which is Nature and yet Nature is subject to Gods Command and depends upon him and if all Gods Attributes be Infinite then his Bounty is Infinite also which cannot be exercised but by an Infinite Gift but a Gift doth not cause a less dependance I do not say That man hath an absolute Free-will or power to move according to his desire for it is not conceived that a part can have an absolute power nevertheless his motion both of body and mind is a free and self-motion and such a self-motion hath every thing in Nature according to its figure or shape for motion and figure being inherent in matter matter moves figuratively Yet do I not say That there is no hindrance obstruction and opposition in nature but as there is no particular Creature that hath an absolute power of self-moving so that Creature which hath the advantage of strength subtilty or policy shape or figure and the like may oppose and over-power another which is inferior to it in all this yet this hinderance and opposition doth not take away self-motion But I perceive your Author is much for necessitation and against free-will which I leave to Moral Philosophers and Divines And as for the ascending of light and descending of heavy bodies there may be many causes but these four are perceiveable by our senses as bulk or quantity of body grossness of substance density and shape or figure which make heavy bodies descend But little quantity purity of substance rarity and figure or shape make light bodies ascend Wherefore I cannot believe that there are certain little bodies as atoms and by reason of their smallness invisible differing from one another in consistence figure motion and magnitude intermingled with the air which should be the cause of the descending of heavy bodies And concerning air whether it be subject to our senses or not I say that if air be neither hot nor cold it is not subject but if it be the sensitive motions will soon pattern it out and declare it I 'le conclude with your Authors question What the cause is that a man doth not feel the weight of Water in Water and answer it is the dilating nature of Water But of this question and of Water I shall treat more fully hereafter and so I rest MADAM Your faithful Friend and Servant XXX MADAM I Am reading now the works of that Famous and most Renowned Author Des Cartes out of which I intend to pick out onely those discourses which I like best and not to examine his opinions as they go along from the beginning to the end of his books And in order to this I have chosen in the first place his discourse of motion and do not assent to his opinion when he defines Motion to be onely a Mode of a thing and not the thing or body it selfe for in my opinion there can be no abstraction made of motion from body neither really nor in the manner of our conception for how can I conceive that which is not nor cannot be in nature that is to conceive motion without body Wherefore Motion is but one thing with body without any separation or abstraction soever Neither doth it agree with my reason that one body can give or transferr motion into another body and as much motion it gives or transferrs into that body as much loses it As for example in two hard bodies thrown against one another where one that is thrown with greater force takes the other along with it and loses as much motion as it gives it For how can motion being no substance but onely a mode quit one body and pass into another One body may either occasion or imitate anothers motion but it can neither give nor take away what belongs to its own or another bodies substance no more then matter can quit its nature from being matter and therefore my opinion is that if motion doth go out of one body into another then substance goes too for motion and substance or body
wherein I desire to submit to the Judgment of the Church which is much wiser then I or any single Person can be However for all what your Author says I do nevertheless verily believe there is a war between Natural motions For example between the Regular motions of Health and the Irregular motions of Sickness and that things applied do oftentimes give assistance to one side or other but many times in the conflict the applied remedies are destroyed and sometimes they are forced to be Neutrals Wherefore though the nature of Infinite Matter is simple and knows of no discord yet her actions may be cross and opposite the truth is Nature could never make such variety did her actions never oppose each other but live in a constant Peace and Unity And thus leaving them to agree I am confident your Ladiship and I shall never disagree for as long as my life doth last I shall always prove MADAM Your constant Friend and faithful Servant VI. MADAM YOur Author condemns the Schools for saying That Air is moist or that it may be converted into Water by pressing it together bringing an example of an Iron Pipe wherein Air has been pressed together which afterwards in its driving out has like a Hand-gun discharged with Gun-powder sent a bullet thorow a board or plank Truly Madam concerning the moisture of Air I am against it but the transchanging of Air into Water I do verily believe viz. that some sorts of Air may be contracted or condensed into Water and that Water again may be dilated into Air but not readily commonly and easily by Art but onely by Nature Wherefore your Authors Experiment can serve for no proof for an artificial trial cannot be an infallible natural demonstration the actions of Art and the actions of Nature being for the most part very different especially in productions and transmutations of natural things Neither can an alteration of parts cause an utter destruction of the whole because when some parts change from their figures other parts of matter change again into the like figures by which successive change the continuation of the whole is kept up Next your Author reproves the Schools for maintaining the opinion that Air is hot for says he Water Air and Earth are cold by Creation because without Light Heat and the partaking of Life He might in my opinion conclude as well that Man is cold by Creation because a Chameleon or a Fish is cold being all of animal kind But why may not some sorts of Air Water and Earth be hot and some be cold as well as some sorts of Light are hot and some cold and so several other Creatures His Reasons prove nothing for Light doth not make Heat nor is it the principle of Heat and it is no consequence to say all that is without Light is without Heat there being many things without Light which nevertheless are Hot But to say Water Air and Earth are cold because they are without heat is no proof but a meer begging of the principle for it is but the same thing as if I should say this is no Stone because it is no Glass And that Water Air and Earth do not partake of Life must be proved first for that is not granted as yet there being according to my opinion not one Creature that wants Life in all Nature Again your Author is of opinion That Water is the first and chief Principle of all Natural things But this I can no more believe then that Water should never change or degenerate from its essence nay if your Author means there shall always be Water in Nature it is another thing but if he thinks that not any part of water doth or can change or degenerate in its nature and is the principle and chief producer of all other Creatures then he makes Water rather a Creator then a Creature and it seems that those Gentiles which did worship Water were of the same opinion whereas yet he condemns all Pagan opinions and all those that follow them Moreover I cannot subscribe to his opinion That Gas and Blas from the Stars do make heat For heat is made several ways according to its several sorts sor there is a dry heat and a moist heat a burning melting and evaporating heat and many more But as for Meteors that they are made by Gas and Blas I can say nothing by reason I am not skilled in Astrology and the science of the Heavens Stars and Planets wherefore if I did offer to meddle with them I should rather express my Ignorance then give your Ladiship any solid reasons and so I am willing to leave this speculation to others resting content with that knowledg Nature hath given me without the help of Learning Which I wholly dedicate and offer to your Ladiship as becomes MADAM Your faithful Friend and Servant VII MADAM HAving made mention in my last of your Authors opinion That Air is in its nature Cold I thought it fit to take a stricter view of the temper of Air and to send you withal my own opinion thereof First of all I would fain know what sort of Air your Author means for if he thinks there is but one sort of Air he might as well say that there is but one sort of Animals or Vegetables whereas yet there are not onely different sorts of animal and vegetable kind but also different particulars in one and the same sort As for example what difference is not amongst Horses as between a Barb a Turk a Ginnet a Courser of Naples a Flanders-horse a Galloway an English-horse and so forth not onely in their shapes but also in their natures tempers and dispositions The like for Cows Oxen Sheep Goats Dogs as also for Fowl and Fish nay for Men. And as for Vegetables What difference is there not between Barly and Wheat and between French-barly Pine-barly and ordinary Barly as also our English-wheat Spanish-wheat Turkish-wheat Indian-wheat and the like What difference is there not amongst Grapes as the Malago Muscadel and other Grapes and so of all the rest of Vegetables The same may be said of the Elements for there is as much difference amongst the Elements as amongst other Creatures And so of Air for Air in some places as in the Indies especially about Brasilia is very much different from our air or from the air that is in other places Indeed in every different Climate you shall find a difference of air wherefore 't is impossible to assign a certain temper of heat or cold to air in general But although my sense and reason inform me that air in its own nature or essence is neither hot nor cold yet it may become hot or cold by hot or cold motions for the sensitive perceptive motions of Air may pattern out heat or cold and hence it is that in Summer when as heat predominates the air is hot and in Winter when as cold predominates the air is cold But perhaps you
Physician in France Dr. Davison who used in continual Fevers to prescribe onely cooling Ptisan made of a little Barley and a great quantity of Water so thin as the Barley was hardly perceived and a spoonfull of syrup of Limmon put into a quart of the said Ptisan but in case of a Flux he ordered some few seeds of Pomegranats to be put into it and this cold Ptisan was to be the Patients onely drink Besides once in Twenty four hours he prescribed a couple of potched Eggs with a little Verjuice and to let the Patient blood if he was dry and hot I mean dry exteriously as from sweat and that either often or seldom according as occasion was found Also he prescribed two grains of Laudanum every night but neither to give the Patient meat nor drink two hours before and after Which advice and Practice of the mentioned Physician concerning Fevers with several others I declared to this Irish Doctor and he observing this rule cured many and so recovered his lost esteem and repute But your Author being all for Wine and against cooling drinks or Julips in hot Fevers says That cooling means are more like to death to cessation from motion and to defect but heat from moderate Wine is a mean like unto life To which I answer first That cold or cooling things are as active as hot or heating things neither is death more cold then hot nor life more hot then cold for we see that Frost is as active and strong as burning heat and Water Air and Earth are as full of life as Fire and Vegetables Minerals and Elements have life as well as Animals But we feeling a Man's flesh cold when he is dissolving from an Animal think death is cold and seeing he was hot before the same alteration say Life is hot Also finding an animal when it is dissolving to be without external local Motion we say it is dead and when it hath as yet this local motion before its alteration we call it alive which certainly is not proper Next I say that a wise Man when his house is fired will fling or squirt water upon it to quench it and take out all moveables lest they should increase the flame likewise he will make vent for the flame to issue forth But perchance your Author may say that Fevers are not hot Truly in my opinion he might say as well that Fire is cold Again he may say That although the effect be hot yet the cause is cold I answer That in some diseases the effects become so firmly rooted and so powerfull that they must be more look'd upon then the cause for such variety there is in Nature that oftentimes that which was now an effect turns to be a cause and again a cause an effect For example A cold cause often produces a hot effect and this hot effect becomes again a cause of a cold effect Which variation is not onely a trouble but a great obstruction to wise Physicians for Nature hath more varieties in diseases then Physicians have remedies And as for drink if Fevers be neither hot nor dry nor require drink for want of moisture then I see no reason why drink should be urged and those Physicians blamed that forbid it for if thirst proceed from an evil digestion drink will rather weaken the stomack for heat and driness draw soon away the drink in the stomack and putting much into a weak stomack doth rather hurt then good But if necessity require it then I approve rather of raw and crude Water then of hot inflaming Wiue And so taking my leave I rest MADAM Your faithful Friend and humble Servant XXXVII MADAM IN your Authors Treatise of Fevers I find one Chapter whose Inscription is A Perfect Curing of all Fevers wherein he declares the secrets of the Cures of Fevers consisting all in Chymical Medicines But considering that if all Fevers could be cured by such Medicines then all Physicians would strive to obtain them I can hardly believe by your Authors favour that any such perfect curing of all Fevers can be effected but that your Authors prescriptions if they should come to the tryal might fail as well as any other Likewise he mentions a Medicine of Paracelsus named Diaceltesson or the Coraline Secret which he says cures radically the Gout no less then Fevers Which if so I wonder why so many Great Noble and Rich Persons groan so much under the pains of the Gout certainly it is not for want of cost to have them prepared nor for want of an ingenious and experienced Chymist for this age doth not want skilful workmen in that Art nor worthy and wise Physicians which if they knew such soveraign medicines would soon apply them to their Patients but I suppose that they finding their effects to be less then the cost and labour bestowed upon them forbear to use them Moreover he mentions another remedy for most diseases by him call'd Driff prepared also by the Art of Chymistry but I believe all those remedies will not so often cure as fail of cure like as the Sympathetical Powder for if there were such soveraign medicines that did never fail of a successful effect certainly men being curious inquisitive and searching would never leave till they had found them out Also amongst Vegetables the herb Chameleon and Arsmart are in great request with your Author For says he they by their touching alone do presently take away cruel diseases or at leastwise ease them Which if so I wonder that there is not more use made of them and they held in greater esteem then they are Also that your Author doth not declare the vertue of them and the manner and way how and in what diseases to use them for the benefit of his neighbour to which end he says all his labours and actions are directed But again your Author confirms as an Eye-witness That the bone of the arm of a Toad presently has taken away the Tooth-ach at the first co-touching Which remedy if it was constant few in my opinion would suffer such cruel pains and cause their teeth to be drawn out especially if sound Likewise of the mineral Electrum or Amber of Paracelsus he affirms to have seen that hung about the neck it has freed those that were persecuted by unclean spirits and that many simples have done the like effects but surely Madam I cannot be perswaded that the Devil should be put away so easily for he being a Spirit will not be chased by corporeal means but by spiritual which is Faith and Prayer and the cure of dispossessing the Devil belongs to Divines and not to Natural Philosopers or Physicians But though exterior remedies as Amulets Pomanders and the like may perform sometimes such effects as to cure or preserve from some diseases yet they are not ordinary and constant but meerly by chance But there are more false remedies then true ones and if one remedy chance to work successfully with
burden so that some bodies may swim and others sink and the cause that a sunk body is not opprest crush'd or squeesed is the dilating nature and quality of water which hinders its parts from pressing or crowding towards a point or center for although water is heavy and apt to descend yet its weight is not caused by a contraction of its substance but by a union of its parts Thus Madam I have obeyed your commands in giving you my reasons to your propounded question which if you approve I have my aim if not I submit to your better judgment for you know I am in all respects MADAM Your Faithful Friend to serve you XIII MADAM I Am glad you are pleased with my reasons I gave to your propounded question concerning the weight of Water and since you have been pleased to send me some more of that subject I shall be ready also to give my answer to them according to the capacity of my judgment First you desire to know How it comes that Water will by degrees ascend through a narrow pipe when the pipe is placed straight upright or perpendicular The reason in my opinion is that Water having a dilative nature when it finds an obstruction to descend or flow even will dilate it self ascendingly according as it hath liberty or freedom and strength or quantity the truth is water would be more apt to ascend then to descend were it not for the close uniting of its liquid Parts which causes its exterior density and this density makes it of more weight then its nature is and the proof that water is apt in its nature to ascend is that some sorts of vapours are made onely by the dilation and rarefaction of ascending Water Your second question is Why the surface of water seems to be concave in its middle and higher on every side I answer The interior figure of water is a circular figure which being a round figure is both concave and convex for where one is the other must be and the motions of ebbing and flowing and ascending or descending are partly of that figure and so according to the exterior dilating strength or weakness the exterior parts of water become either concave or convex for in a full strength as a full stream the exterior parts of water flow in a convex figure but when they want strength they ebb in a concave figure Your third question is What makes frozen water apt to break those Vessels wherein it is contained in the act of freezing or congealing I answer The same cause that makes water clear as also more swell'd then usually it is which cause is the inherent dilative nature of water for water being naturally dilative when as cold attractions do assault it the moist dilations of water in the conflict use more then their ordinary strength to resist those cold contracting motions by which the body of water dilates it self into a larger compass according as it hath liberty or freedom or quantity of parts and the cold parts not being able to drive the water back to its natural compass bind it as it is extended like as if a beast should be bound when his legs and neck are thrust out at the largest extent in striving to kick or thrust away his enemies and imprisoners And so the reason why water breaks those vessels wherein it is inclosed in the act of its freezing or congealing is that when the cold contractions are so strong as they endeavour to extinguish the dilating nature of water the water resisting forces its parts so as they break the vessel which incloses them The same reason makes Ice clear and transparent for it is not the rarefaction of water that doth it but the dilation which causes the parts of water to be not onely more loose and porous but also more smooth and even by resisting the clold contractions for every part endeavours to defend their borders with a well ordered and regular flowing or streaming and not onely to defend but to enlarge their compass against their enemies Your fourth question is How it comes that Snow and Salt mixt together doth make Ice The reason in my judgment is that Salt being very active and partly of the nature of fire doth sometimes preserve and sometimes destroy other bodies according to its power or rather according to the nature of those bodies it works on and salt being mixt with snow endeavours to destroy it but having not so much force melts it onely by its heat and reduces it into its first principle which is water altering the figure of snow but the cold contractions remaining in the water and endeavouring to maintain and keep their power straight draw the water or melted snow into the figure of ice so as neither the salts heat nor the waters dilative nature are able to resist or destroy those cold contractions for although they destroy'd the first figure which is snow yet they cannot hinder the second which is Ice Your last question is How the Clouds can hang so long in the Skie without falling down Truly Madam I do not perceive that Clouds being come to their full weight and gravity do keep up in the air but some of them fall down in showres of rain others in great and numerous flakes of snow some are turned into wind and some fall down in thick mists so that they onely keep up so long until they are of a full weight for descent or till their figure is altered into some other body as into air wind rain lightning thunder snow hail mist and the like But many times their dilating motions keep or hinder them from descending to which contracting motions are required In my opinion it is more to be admired that the Sea doth not rise then that Clouds do not fall for as we see Clouds fall very often as also change from being Clouds to some other figure Wherefore it is neither the Sun nor Stars nor the Vapours which arise from the Earth and cause the Clouds nor the porositity of their bodies nor the Air that can keep or hinder them from falling or changing to some other body but they being come to their full weight fall or change according as is fittest for them And these are all the reasons I can give you for the present if they do not satisfie you I will study for others and in all occasions endeavour to express my self MADAM Your constant Friend and faithful Servant XIV MADAM SInce in my last I made mention of the Congealing of Water into Ice and Snow I cannot choose but by the way tell you that I did lately meet with an Author who is of opinion That Snow is nothing else but Ice broken or ground into small pieces To which I answer That this opinion may serve very well for a Fancy but not for a Rational Truth or at least for a Probable Reason For why may not the cold motions make snow without beating or grinding as well as
Animals do often see in the dark and in sleep I will not say but that the animate matter which by self-motion doth make the Perception of light with other perceptive Figures and so animal perceptive light may be the presenter or ground perceptive figure of sight yet the sensitive corporeal motions can make other figures without the help of light and such as light did never present But when the eye patterns out an exterior object presented by light it patterns also out the object of light for the sensitive motions can make many figures by one act not onely in several organs but in one organ as for example there is presented to sight a piece of Imbroydery wherein is silk silver and gold upon Sattin in several forms or figures as several flowers the sensitive motions streight by one and the same act pattern out all those several figures of flowers as also the figures of Silk Silver Gold and Sattin without any pressure of these objects or motions in the medium for if they all should press the eye would no more see the exterior objects then the nose being stopt could smell a presented perfume Thirdly They may ask me if sight be made in the eye and proceeds not from the outward object what is the reason that we do not see inwardly but outwardly as from us I answer when we see objects outwardly as from us then the sensitive motions work on the outside of the organ which organ being outwardly convex causes us to see outwardly as from us but in dreams we see inwardly also the sensitive motions do pattern out the distance together with the object But you will say the body of the distance as the air cannot be perceived and yet we can perceive the distance I answer you could not perceive the distance but by such or such an object as is subject to your sight for you do not see the distance more then the air or the like rare body that is between grosser objects for if there were no stars nor planets nor clouds nor earth nor water but onely air you would not see any space or distance but light being a more visible body then air you might figure the body of air by light but so as in an extensive or dilating way for when the mind or the rational matter conceives any thing that hath not such an exact figure or is not so perceptible by our senses then the mind uses art and makes such figures which stand like to that as for example to express infinite to it self it dilates it parts without alteration and without limitation or circumference Likewise when it will conceive a constant succession of Time it draws out its parts into the figure of a line and if eternity it figures a line without beginning and end But as for Immaterial no mind can conceive that for it cannot put it self into nothing although it can dilate and rarifie it self to an higher degree but must stay within the circle of natural bodies as I within the circle of your Commands to express my self MADAM Your faithful Friend and obedient Servant XXI MADAM HEat and Cold according to your Authors opinion are made by Dilation and Contraction for says he When the Motion of the ambient aethereal substance makes the spirits and fluid parts of our bodies tend outwards we acknowledg heat but by the indeavour inwards of the same spirits and humors we feel cold so that to cool is to make the exterior parts of the body endeavour inwards by a motion contrary to that of calefaction by which the internal parts are called outwards He therefore that would know the cause of Cold must find by what motion the exterior parts of any body endeavour to retire inwards But I desire you to consider Madam that there be moist Colds and dry Heats as well as dry Colds and moist Heats wherefore all sorts of Cold are not made by the retyring of parts inwards which is contraction or attraction neither are all sorts of Heat made by parts tending outwards which is dilation or rarefaction for a moist cold is made by dilation and a dry heat by contraction as well as a moist heat is made by dilation and a dry cold by contraction But your Author makes not this difference but onely a difference between a dilated heat and a contracted cold but because a cold wind is made by breath blown thorow pinched or contracted lips and an hot wind by breath through opened and extended lips should we judg that all heat and cold must be made after one manner or way The contracted mouth makes Wind as well as the dilated but yet Wind is not made that way as heat and cold for it may be that onely the air pressed together makes wind or it may be that the corporeal motions in the air may change air into wind as they change water into vapour and vapour into air or it may be something else that is invisible and rare as air and there may be several sorts of wind air heat cold as of all other Creatures more then man is capable to know As for your Authors opinion concerning the congealing of Water and how Ice is made I will not contradict it onely I think nature hath an easier way to effect it then he describes Wherefore my opinion is that it is done by altering motions as for example the corporeal motions making the figure of water by dilation in a Circle figure onely alter from such a dilating circular figure into a contracted square which is Ice or into such a contracted triangle as is snow And thus water and vapour may be changed with ease without any forcing pressing raking or the like The same may be said of hard and bent bodies and of restitution as also of air thunder and lightning which are all done by an easie change of motion and changing into such or such a figure is not the motion of Generation which is to build a new house with old materials but onely a Transformation I say a new house with old materials not that I mean there is any new Creation in nature of any thing that was not before in nature for nature is not God to make new beings out of nothing but any thing may be called new when it is altered from one figure into another I add no more at this time but rest MADAM Your faithful Friend and Servant XXII MADAM THe Generation of sound according to your worthy Authors opinion is as follows As Vision says he so hearing is Generated by the medium but but not in the same manner for sight is from pressure that is from an endeavour in which there is no perceptible progression of any of the parts of the medium but one part urging or thrusting on another propagateth that action successively to any distance whatsoever where as the motion of the medium by which sound is made is a stroke for when we hear the drum of the
answer To my sense and reason it were possible if extremes were in Nature but I do not perceive that in Nature there be any although my sense and reason doth perceive alterations in the effects of Nature for though one and the same part may alter from contraction to dilation and from dilation to contraction yet this contraction and dilation are not extremes neither are they performed at one and the same time but at different times But having sufficiently declared my opinion hereof in my former Letters I 'l add no more but rest MADAM Your faithful Friend and Servant XII MADAM MY discourse of Water in my last Letter has given you occasion to enquire after the reason Why the weight of a great body of water doth not press so hard and heavily as to bruise or crush a body when it is sunk down to the bottom As for example If a man should be drowned and afterwards cast out from the bottom of a great Sea or River upon the shore he would onely be found smother'd or choak'd to death and not press'd crush'd or bruised by the weight of water I answer The reasons are plain for first the nature of a mans respiration requires such a temperature of breath to suck in as is neither too thick nor too thin for his lungs and the rest of his interior parts as also for the organs and passages of his exterior senses but fit proper and proportionable to those mentioned parts of his body As for example in a too thin and rarified air man will be as apt to die for want of breath as in a too gross and thick air he is apt to die with a superfluity of the substance he imbreaths for thick smoak or thick vapour as also too gross air will soon smother a man to death and as for choaking if a man takes more into his throat then he can swallow he will die and if his stomack be filled with more food then it is able to digest if it cannot discharge it self he will die with the excess of food and if there be no food or too little put into it he will also die for want of food So the eye if it receives too many or too gross or too bright objects it will be dazled or blinded and some objects through their purity are not to be seen at all The same for Hearing and the rest of the exterior senses And this is the reason why man or some animal Creatures are smother'd and choak'd with water because water is thicker then the grossest air or vapour for if smoak which is rarer then water will smother and choak a man well may water being so much thicker But yet this smothering or choaking doth not prove that water hath an interior or innate density as your Authors opinion is no more then smoak or thick and gross air hath but the density of water is caused more through the wet and moist exterior parts joyning and uniting closely together and the interior nature of smoak being more moist or glutinous then thin air and so more apt to unite its exterior parts it makes it to come in effect nearer to water for though water and smoak are both of rare natures yet not so rare as clear and pure air neither is water or smoak so porous as pure air by reason the exterior parts of water and smoak are more moist or glutinous then pure air But the thickness of water and smoak is the onely cause of the smothering of men or some animals as by stopping their breath for a man can no more live without air then he can without food and a well tempered or middle degree of air is the most proper for animal Respiration for if the air be too thick it may soon smother or choak him and if too thin it is not sufficient to give him breath And this is the reason that a man being drown'd is not onely smother'd but choak'd by water because there enters more through the exterior passages into his body then can be digested for water is apt to flow more forcibly and with greater strength then air not that it is more dilating then air but by reason it is thicker and so stronger or of more force for the denser a body is the stronger it is and a heavy body when moved is more forcible then a light body But I pray by this expression mistake not the nature of water for the interior nature of water hath not that gravity which heavy or dense bodies have its nature being rare and light as air or fire but the weight of water as I said before proceeds onely from the closeness and compactness of its exterior parts not through a contraction in its interior nature and there is no argument which proves better that water in its interior nature is dilating then that its weight is not apt to press to a point for though water is apt to descend through the union of its parts yet it cannot press hard by reason of its dilating nature which hinders that heavy pressing quality for a dilating body cannot have a contracted weight I mean so as to press to a Center which is to a point and this is the reason that when a grave or heavy body sinks down to the bottom of water it is not opprest hurt crusht or bruised by the weight of water for as I said the nature of water being dilating it can no more press hard to a center then vapour air or fire The truth is water would be as apt to ascend as descend if it were not for the wet glutinous and sticking cleaving quality of its exterior parts but as the quantity and quality of the exterior parts makes water apt to sink or descend so the dilating nature makes it apt to flow if no hinderance stop its course also the quantity and quality of its exterior parts is the cause that some heavy bodies do swim without sinking as for example a great heavy Ship will not readily sink unless its weight be so contracted as to break asunder the united parts of water for the wet quality of water causing its exterior parts to joyn close gives it such an united strength as to be able to bear a heavy burden if the weight be dilated or level and not piercing or penetrating for those bodies that are most compact will sink sooner although of less weight then those that are more dilated although of greater weight Also the exterior and outward shape or form makes some bodies more apt to sink then others Indeed the outward form and shape of Creatures is one of the chief causes of either sinking or swimming But to conclude water in its interior nature is of a mean or middle degree as neither too rare nor too grave a body and for its exterior quality it is in as high a degree for wetness as fire is for heat and being apt both to divide and to unite it can bear a burden and devour a
they make Ice Surely Nature is wiser then to trouble her self with unnecessary labour and to make an easie work difficult as Art her Creature doth or as some dull humane capacities conceive for it is more easie for Nature to make Snow by some sorts of cold contractions as she makes Ice by other sorts of cold contractions then to force Air and Wind to beat grinde or pound Ice into Snow which would cause a confusion and disturbance through the Irregularity of several parts being jumbled in a confused manner together The truth is it would rather cause a War in Nature then a natural production alteration or transformation Neither can I conceive in what region this turbulent and laborious work should be acted certainly not in the caverns of the Earth for snow descends from the upper Region But perchance this Author believes that Nature imploys Wind as a Hand and the Cold air as a Spoon to beat Ice like the white of an Egg into a froth of Snow But the great quantity of Snow in many places doth prove that Snow is not made of the fragments of Ice but that some sorts of cold contractions on a watery body make the figure of snow in the substance of water as other sorts of cold contractions make the figure of ice which motions and figures I have treated of in my Book of Philosophy according to that Judgment and Reason which Nature has bestowed upon me The Author of this Fancy gives the same reason for Snow being white For Ice says he is a transparent body and all transparent bodies when beaten into powder appear white and since Snow is nothing else but Ice powder d small it must of necessity shew white Truly Madam I am not so experienced as to know that all transparent bodies being beaten small shew white but grant it be so yet that doth not prove that the whiteness of snow proceeds from the broken parts of Ice unless it be proved that the whiteness of all bodies proceeds from the powdering of transparent bodies which I am sure he cannot do for Silver and millions of other things are white which were never produced from the powder of transparent bodies Neither do I know any reason against it but that which makes a Lilly white may also be the cause of the whiteness of Snow that is such a figure as makes a white colour for different figures in my opinion are the cause of different colours as you will find in my Book of Philosophy where I say that Nature by contraction of lines draws such or such a Figure which is such or such a Colour as such a Fgure is red and such a Figure is green and so of all the rest But the Palest colours and so white are the loosest and slackest figures Indeed white which is the nearest colour to light is the smoothest evenest and straightest figure and composed of the smallest lines As for example suppose the figure of 8. were the colour of Red and the figure of 1. the colour of White or suppose the figure of Red to be a z. and the figure of an r. to be the figure of Green and a straight l. the figure of White And mixt figures make mixt colours The like examples may be brought of other Figures as of a Harpsichord and its strings a Lute and its strings a Harp and its strings c. By which your Reason shall judg whether it be not easier for Nature to make Snow and its whiteness by the way of contraction then by the way of dissolution As for example Nature in making Snow contracts or congeals the exterior figure of Water into the figure of a Harp which is a Triangular figure with the figure of straight strings within it for the exterior figure of the Harp represents the exterior figure of Snow and the figure of the strings extended in straight lines represent the figure of its whiteness And thus it is easier to make Snow and its whiteness at one act then first to contract or congeal water into Ice and then to cause wind and cold air to beat and break that Ice into powder and lastly to contract or congeal that powder into flakes of Snow Which would be a very troublesom work for Nature viz. to produce one effect by so many violent actions and several labours when the making of two figures by one action will serve the turn But Nature is wiser then any of her Creatures can conceive for she knows how to make and how to dissolve form and transform with facility and ease without any difficulty for her actions are all easie and free yet so subtil curious and various as not any part or creature of Nature can exactly or throughly trace her ways or know her wisdom And thus leaving her I rest MADAM Your faithful Friend and Servant XV. MADAM I Have taken several questions out of your new Author which I intend to answer in this present Letter according to the conceptions of my own sense and reason and to submit them to your censure which if you vouchsafe to grant me without partiality I shall acknowledge my self much obliged to you for this favour The first question is Why wet Linnen is dried in the Air I answer That according to my sense and reason the water which is spred upon the linnen being not united in a full and close body dilates beyond the Circle-degree of water and wetness and so doth easily change from water to vapour and from vapour to air whereby the linnen becomes as dry as it was before it became wet The second question is Why Water and Wine intermix so easily and suddenly together I answer All wet liquors although their exterior figures do differ yet their interior natures figures and forms are much alike and those things that are of the same interior nature do easily and suddenly joyn as into one Wherefore Wine and Water having both wet natures do soon incorporate together whereas were they of different natures they would not so peaceably joyn together but by their contrary natures become enemies and strive to destroy each other but this is to be observed that the sharp points of the Circle-lines of Wine by passing through the smooth Circle-lines of Water help to make a more hasty and sudden conjunction The third question is Why Light which in its nature is white shining through a coloured Glass doth appear of the same colour which the Glass is of either Blew Green Red or the like I answer The reason is that though Light in its nature be white and the Glass clear and transparent yet when as the Glass is stained or painted with colours both the clearness of the glass and the whiteness of the light is obstructed by the figure of that colour the glass is stained or painted withal and the light spreading upon or thorow the glass represents it self in the figure of that same colour indeed in all probability to sense and reason it appears that