[ 646 ] 
Remarks. 
When I firft thought of the 20th and 2 2d pro- 
poiitions, I imagined that when two bodies were 
connedted by a cylindric canal of real fluid, the rc- 
pulfion of one bpdy on the whole quantity of fluid in 
the canal, in one diredlion, would be equal to that of 
the other body on it in the contrary diredlion, in 
whatever manner the fluid was difpofed in the canal ; 
and that therefore thofe propofltions would have held 
good very nearly, though the bodies were joined by 
cylindric canals of real fluid j provided the bodies 
were fo little over or undercharged, that the quantity 
of redundant or deficient fluid in the canal fliould be 
very fmall in refped: of the quantity required to fa- 
turate it ; and confequently that the fluid therein 
fhould be very nearly of the fame denfity in all parts. 
But from the foregoing propofition it appears that I 
was miftaken, and that the repulfion of one body on 
the fluid in the canal is not equal to that of the 
other body on it, unlefs the fluid in the canal is dif- 
pofed in a particular manner : befides that, when two 
bodies are both joined by a real canal, the attraftion 
or repulfion of the redundant matter or fluid in the 
canal, has fome tendency to alter the difpofition of 
the fluid in the two bodies j and in the 2 2d propo- 
fition, the canal C G exerts allb fome attradlion or 
repulfion on the canal EM: on all which accounts 
the demonftration of thofe propofltions is de- 
fe(flive, when the bodies are joined by real canals. 
I have good reafon however to think, that thofe propo- 
fltions adually hold good very nearly when the bodies 
are 
