The Fourth Part.

ANd thus much (sayes Carneades) may suffice to be said of the Number of the Distinct substances separable from mixt Bodies by the Fire: Wherefore I now proceed to consider the nature of them, and shew you, That though they seem Homogeneous Bodies, yet have they not the purity and simplicity that is requisite to Elements. And I should immediately proceed to the proof of my Assertion, but that the Confidence wherewith Chymists are wont to call each of the Substances we speak of by the name of Sulphur or Mercury, or the other of the Hypostaticall Principles, and the intollerabln Ambiguity they allow themselves ie their Writings and Expressions, makes it necessary for me in Order to the Keeping you either from mistaking me, or thinking I mistake the Controversie, to take Notice to you and complain of the unreasonable Liberty they give themselves of playing with Names at pleasure. And indeed if I were oblig’d in this Dispute, to have such regard to the Phraseology of each particular Chymist, as not to Write any thing which this or that Author may not pretend, not to contradict this or that sence, which he may give as Occasion serves to his Ambiguous Expressions, I should scarce know how to dispute, nor which way to turn myself. For I find that even Eminent Writers, (such as Raymund Lully, Paracelsus and others) do so abuse the termes they employ, that as they will now and then give divers things, one name; so they will oftentimes give one thing, many Names; and some of them (perhaps) such, as do much more properly signifie some Distinct Body of another kind; nay even in Technical Words or Termes of Art, they refrain not from this Confounding Liberty; but will, as I have Observ’d, call the same Substance, sometimes the Sulphur, and Sometimes the Mercury of a Body. And now I speak of Mercury, I cannot but take Notice, that the Descriptions they give us of that Principle or Ingredient of mixt Bodies, are so