[ 3o6 ] 
waterfpouts at largCj written fome time fince. I 
know not whether they will be publifhed ; if not, I 
will get them tranfcribed for your perufal. It does 
not appear to me, that Pere Beccaria doubts of the 
abfolute impermeability of glajs in the fenfe I meant it ; 
tor the inftances he gives of holes made through 
glafs by the eleftric ftroke are fuch, as we have all 
experienced, and only fhew, that the electric fluid 
could not pafs without making a hole. In the fame 
manner we fay, glafs is impermeable to water, and 
yet a flream from a fire-engine will force through the 
ilrongeft panes of a window. As to the effed: of 
points in drawing the eledric matter from clouds, 
and thereby fecuring buildings, ^c. which, you fay, he 
iktms to doubt, I muft own I think he only fpeaks 
modeftly and judicioufly. I find I have been but 
partly underflood in that matter. I have mentioned 
it in feveral of my letters, and except once, always 
in the alternative, viz. that pointed rods ereded on 
buildings, and communicating with the moifl earth, 
would cither prevent a flroke, or, if not prevented, 
would condiiB it, fo as that the building fhould fufler 
no damage. Yet whenever my opinion is examined 
in Europe, nothing is confidered but the probability 
of thofe rods prevetiting a ftroke, or explofion; 
which is only a part of the ufe I propofed from them j 
and the other part, their conducting a ftroke, which 
they may happen not to prevent, feems to be totally 
forgotten, tho’ of equal importance and advantage. 
I thank you for communicating M. de Bufibn’s 
relation of the effeCl of lightning at Dijon, on the 
?th of June laft. In return give me leave to relate 
an inftance I lately faw of the fapie kind. Being in 
the 
3 
