the surface of the sea to the region of the clouds, or higher; for this reason it is quite unlikely to be collected into masses, or a body, upon its falling; but would descend in progression according to the several degrees of altitude the different portions had arrived at when it received this new determination.

Now that there cannot more rise upon the common hypothesis than I have mentioned, may appear probable, if we attend to the only efficient cause in supposed ascending spouts, viz. whirlwinds.

We know that the rarefaction of the lower, and the condensation of the upper region of air, are the only natural causes of whirlwinds. Let us then suppose the former as hot as their greatest summer heat in England, and the latter as cold as the extent of their winter. These extremes have been found there to alter the weight of the air one-tenth, which is equal to a little more than three feet water. Were this case possible, and a whirlwind take place in it, it might act with a force equal to the mentioned difference. But as this is the whole strength, so much water could not rise; therefore to allow it due motion upwards, we must abate, at least, one-fourth part, perhaps more, to give it such a swift ascension as some think usual. But here several difficulties occur, at least they are so to me. As, whether this quantity would render the spout opaque? since it is plain that in drops it could not do so. How, or by what means it may be reduced small enough? or, if the water be not reduced into vapour, what will suspend it in the region of the clouds when exonerated there? And, if vapourized while ascending, how can it be dangerous by what they call the breaking? For it is difficult to conceive how a condensative power

should

should instantaneously take place of a rarefying and disseminating one.

The sudden fall of the spout, or rather, the sudden ceasing of it, I accounted for, in my way, before. But it seems necessary to mention something I then forgot. Should it be said to do so (i. e.) to fall, because all the lower rarefied air is ascended, whence the whirlwind must cease, and its burden drop; I cannot agree to this, unless the air be observed on a sudden to have grown much colder, which I cannot learn has been the

case.

Or should it be supposed that the spout was, on a sudden, obstructed at the top, and this the cause of the fall, however plausible this might appear, yet no more water would fall than what was at the same time contained in the column, which is often, by many and satisfactory accounts to me, again far from being the

case.

We are, I think, sufficiently assured, that not only tons, but scores or hundreds of tons descend in one spout. Scores of tons more than can be contained in the trunk of it, should we suppose water to ascend.

But, after all, it does not appear that the above-mentioned different degrees of heat and cold concur in any region where spouts usually happen, nor, indeed, in any other.

Observations on the Meteorological Paper; by a Gentleman in Connecticut.

Read at the Royal Society, Nov. 4, 1756.

"AIR and water mutually attract each other, (saith Mr. F.) hence water will dissolve in air, as salt in wa

ter."

ter." I think that he hath demonstrated, that the sup porting of salt in water is not owing to its superficies being increased, because "the specific gravity of salt is not altered by dividing of it, any more than that of lead, sixteen bullets of which, of an ounce each, weigh as much in water as one of a pound." But yet, when this came to be applied to the supporting of water in air, I found an objection rising in my mind.

In the first place, I have always been loth to seek for any new hypothesis, or particular law of nature, to account for any thing that may be accounted for from the known, general, and universal law of nature; it being an argument of the infinite wisdom of the author of the world, to effect so many things by one general law. Now I had thought that the rising and support of water in air, might be accounted for from the general law of gravitation, by only supposing the spaces occupied by the same quantity of water increased.

And, with respect to the lead, I queried thus in my own mind; whether if the superficies of a bullet of lead should be increased four or five fold by an internal vacuity, it would weigh the same in water as before. I mean, if a pound of lead should be formed into a hollow globe, empty within, whose superficies should be four or five times as big as that of the same lead when a solid lump, it would weigh as much in water as before. I supposed it would not. If this concavity was filled with water, perhaps it might; if with air, it would weigh at least as much less, as this difference between the weight of that included air, and that of water.

Now although this would do nothing to account for the dissolution of salt in water, the smallest lumps of salt being no more hollow spheres, or any thing of the

like nature than the greatest; yet, perhaps, it might account for water's rising and being supported in air. For you know that such hollow globules, or bubbles,' abound upon the surface of the water, which even by the breath of our mouths, we can cause to quit the water, and rise in the air.

These bubbles I used to suppose to be coats of water, containing within them air rarefied and expanded with fire, and that, therefore, the more friction and dashing there is upon the surface of the waters, and the more heat and fire, the more they abound.

And I used to think, that although water be specifically heavier than air, yet such a bubble, filled only with fire and very rarefied air, may be lighter than a quantity of common air, of the same cubical dimensions, and, therefore, ascend; for the rarefied air inclosed, may more fall short of the same bulk of common air, in weight, 'than the watery coat exceeds a like bulk of common air in gravity.

This was the objection in my mind, though, I must confess, I know not how to account for the watery coat's encompassing the air, as above-mentioned, without allowing the attraction between air and water, which the gentleman supposes; so that I do not know but that this objection, examined by that sagacious genius, will be an additional confirmation of the hypothesis.

The gentleman observes," that a certain quantity of moisture should be every moment discharged and taken away from the lungs; and hence accounts for the suffocating nature of snuffs of candles, as impregnating the air with grease, between which and water there is a natural repellency; and of air that hath been frequently breathed in, which is overloaded with water, and, for

that

that reason, can take no more air. Perhaps the same observation will account for the suffocating nature of damps in wells.

But then if the air can support and take off but such a proportion of water, and it is necessary that water be so taken off from the lungs, I queried with myself how it is we can breathe in an air full of vapours, so full as that they continually precipitated. Do not we see the air overloaded, and casting forth water plentifully when there is no suffocation?

The gentleman again observes, "That the air under the equator, and between the tropics, being constantly heated and rarefied by the sun, rises; its place is supplied by air from northern and southern latitudes, which, coming from parts where the air and earth had less motion, and not suddenly acquiring the quicker motion of the equatorial earth, appears an east wind blowing westward; the earth moving from west to east, and slipping under the air.”

In reading this, two objections occurred to my mind:

First, that it is said, the trade-wind doth not blow in the forenoon, but only in the afternoon.

Secondly, that either the motion of the northern and southern air towards the equator is so slow, as to acquire almost the same motion as the equatorial air when it arrives there, so that there will be no sensible difference; or else the motion of the northern and southern air towards the equator, is quicker, and must be sensible; and then the trade-wind must appear either as a south-east or north-east wind: south of the equator, a south-east wind; north of the equator, a northeast. For the apparent wind must be compounded of