C 55» ) 
3 He fay s,that more might be [aid cut of my reUtion tojhew.that the 
Imd^e vp^smt tranfvers, for if it had been tranfvers.l could not have 
been furPrizedias IfaU I tt>as)to fee the length thereof {o muchtxceed 
the breadth it bemga thing fo obvious & e^Jie to be explicated by the or- 
dinars rule] of Refraction. But on the contrary,u may rather be faid, 
that if the Image had been parallel , I could not have been furpri- 
zed to fee the length thereof fomuch exceed the breadth , ic being 
arhingfoextreanily obvious as not co need any explication. For 
who chac had but common fenfe^and faw the whole Prifm or a good 
pare of ic illuminated, could not expeft the lighc fliould have the 
fame long figure upon the wall that it had when it came out of the 
frifm ? Mr. Linus therefore, while he would ftrergthen his argu- 
menc by reprefenting me well skilled in Opticks, does but over- 
throw it. But whereas he fayes, Icouldnot have been furprized at the 
lengthy had the Image been parallel, it being a thing fo obvious and eafy 
to be explicated by the ordinary rules of refraciion\ Let any Man rake 
the Experiment intire as I have there delivered it^that is, with this 
condition, that therefradtions on both fides the Prijm were equal, and 
try if he can reconcile it with the ordinary rules of refraftion. On 
thecontrarv,hemay find the impoffibility of fuch a reconciliation, 
demonft rated in my Anfwer to P. Par dies 8 4, 4091. 
In thelaft place,he ob;efts,that my faying in N.So.p.^ojj.that 
the incident refractions were in the Experiment equd to the emer- 
gent, pn ves again, that the long Image was parallel. And yet that 
very fay ing is a fufficient argument, that I meant the contrary, be- 
caufeit be comes wholly impertinent, if apply'd to a pa rail el image; 
b'Jt in the o her cafe is a very neceffary circumflance. What is ad- 
ded therefore P. Fardies,mghi have been fpared , efpecially 
fince that Learned Perfon underdood my difcourfe to be meant 
of a tranfvers Image, and acquiefced in my Anfwers. 
This in anfwer to Mr. Linuis Letter: And now to takeaw^ay 
the like fiifpicions from his Friends, if my declaration of my 
meaning fatisfie nor, I fliall notefome further paflages in nry Let- 
ters, whereby they may fee, how I was to be underftood from the 
beginn rg, as totheaforcfaid three circumftances* 
Forthe-D-y; I exprefs every where that the Experiment was 
tried in the Sun's light, and in A"^. 80. /^.307 7, thatthe breadth of 
the Image by meafureanfwered to the Sun's diameter : But becaufe 
it is pretended, I w^as impofed upon, \ would ask, what the Ex- 
periment as it is advanced to that which I called the Experimen- 
turn 
