But let us consider what is not of so subtle a mi* 

 ture, nor, therefore, so liable to elude our enquiries. 

 Surely we understand the air we breathe, and which 

 encompasses us on every side. By its elasticity, it 

 seems to be the grand mover and general spring of 

 all sublunary nature. But is elasticity essential to 

 air, and, consequently, inseparable from it? Not 

 so. It has beeu lately proved, . by numberless ex- 

 periments, that it may bejixed, divested of its elas- 

 ticity, and generated or restored ta it anew: there* 

 fore, elasticity is not essential to air, any more than 

 fluidity is to wafer. Is it then elastic any otherwise 

 than as it is joined to another body I As every par- 

 ticle of air is, in its ordinary state, attached to a par- 

 ticle of ether, or electric fire, does it not derive its 

 whole elasticity from thia, (perhaps the only trire, 

 essential elastic in nature,) and, consequently, when 

 separated from this, lose all its elastic force 1 For 

 want of which it is then effete, and will neither sus- 

 tain flame., nor the life of animals. 



By what powers do the dew, the rain, the other 

 vapours, rise and fall in the air 1 Can we account 

 for all the phenomena of them upon the common 

 principles? And can we demonstrate that this is 

 the true, the most rational way of accounting for 

 them ? Or shall we say, with a late ingenious writer, 

 that those principles are utterly insufficient ? And 

 that they cannot be accounted for at all, but upoa 

 the principles of electricity ? 



