The Fourth Part.

sapid and dissoluble in Water, and the other not: Besides, we see that sapidness and volatility are wont to denominate the Chymists Mercury or Spirit; and yet how many Bodies, think you, may agree in those Qualities which may yet be of very differing natures, and disagree in qualities either more numerous, or more considerable, or both. For not only Spirit of Nitre, Aqua Fortis, Spirit of Salt, Spirit of Oyle of Vitriol, Spirit of Allome, Spirit of Vinager, and all Saline Liquors Distill’d from Animal Bodies, but all the Acetous Spirits of Woods freed from their Vinager; All these, I say, and many others must belong to the Chymists Mercury, though it appear not why some of them should more be comprehended under one denomination then the Chymists Sulphur, or Oyle should likewise be; for their Distill’d Oyles are also Fluid, Volatile, and Tastable, as well as their Mercury; Nor is it Necessary, that their Sulphur should be Unctuous or Dissoluble in Water, since they generally referr Spirit of Wine to Sulphurs, although that Spirit be not Unctuous, and will freely mingle with Water. So that bare Inflamability must constitute the Essence of the Chymists Sulphur; as uninflamablenesse joyned with any taste is enough to intitle a Distill’d Liquor to be their Mercury. Now since I can further observe to You, that Spirit of Nitre and Spirit of Harts-horne being pour’d together will boile and hisse and tosse up one another into the air, which the Chymists make signes of great Antipathy in the Natures of Bodies (as indeed these Spirits differ much both in Taste, Smell, and Operations;) Since I elsewhere tell you of my having made two sorts of Oyle out of the same mans blood, that would not mingle with one another; And since I might tell You Divers Examples I have met with, of the Contrariety of Bodies which according to the Chymists must be huddl’d up together under one Denomination; I leave you to Judge whether such a multitude of Substances as may agree in these sleight Qualities, and yet Disagree in Others more Considerable, are more worthy to be call’d by the Name of a Principle (which ought to be pure and homogeneous,) than to have appellations given them that may make them differ, in name too, from the bodies from which they