[ 6 3 ] 
houfe ; which amendment was no fooner propofed, 
than approved of. 
Why my obfervation was rejedted at the preced- 
ing meeting, I muft leave to the judgment of others. 
But it certainly carries an appearance, as it manijejl 
contradiction.), upon further refle&ion, muft have 
been the canfe of that alteration. 
And I am inclined to believe, from fome gen- 
tlemen of the committee expreiftng their opinion, 
«< of its being a matter of mere indifference 'whether 
“ blunted or pointed conductors were made ufe off 
that they have not confidered this fubjedt, with all 
the due attention which fo important an objedt 
deferves. 
For if our experiments (hew, that points , from 
the nature of their fl. )ape, and other circumftances 
attending them, refift the attacks of this fluid lefs 
than blunted ones ; and that blunted conductors, 
of proper dimenfions, are fuflicient to convey away 
the lightning fafely , whenever it attacks them; 
why fhould we have recourfe to a method, which 
is at beft uncertain ; and which fome time or other 
may be productive of the moft fatal effedts ? 
But perhaps no argument can be brought with 
more force againft the principle of points, than Dr. 
Franklin’s own words, which are publifhed in his 
experiments, p. 481, where he declares pof lively. 
“ Buildings, that have their roofs covered with 
“ lead, or other metal, and fpouts of metal conti- 
“ nued from the roof into the ground to carry off 
“ the water, are never hurt by lightning ; as when- 
“ ever it falls on fuch a building, it paftes in the 
“ metals, and not in the walls.” 
This 
