[ 2 75 ] 
XXVIII. Thoughts on the different Impregna- 
tion of Mineral Waters \ more particularly 
concerning the Ex i fence of Sulphur in fo7ne 
of them, by John Rutty, DoElor of Phyfc. 
Read Nov. I 5 .TNASMUCH as the exigence of fulphur 
n JL in waters hath been doubted, not only 
by Lifter and Hoffman, but by another author, that 
has lately appeared, to whom the public has been, 
in fome meafure, indebted for exploding fulphur 
from fome waters, on which it had been too liberally, 
and without the due evidence of experiment, attri- 
buted ; I have therefore thought it worth while to 
review, collect, and fum up, the evidences of fulphur 
in waters, in order to (hew, not only that antiquity 
hath not altogether rafhly attributed fulphur to wa- 
ters, but how far the exiftence of that mineral is de- 
monftrable to fenfe in feveral, and more efpecially 
the cold, waters of that denomination. 
1. That the fetor of thefe waters is not owing to 
mere ftagnation ; and that they poflefs fomething 
more than what common water acquires by putrefac- 
tion, appears not only from Dr. Short’s obfervation 
of fome of thefe having a full and brifk current, but 
becaufe putrid rain-water, and many of our chalybeat 
waters, turned putrid by keeping, do not difcolour 
metals, as thefe waters do. 
2. The effects of thefe waters, and their vapours, 
in difcolouring metals, and their peculiar fmell and 
flavour, like that of boiled eggs, and in the ftronger 
like that of rotten eggs, are perfectly fimilar to thofe 
N n 2 of 
