Observations upon experimental philosophy to which is added The description of a new blazing world / written by the thrice noble, illustrious, and excellent princesse, the Duchess of Newcastle.

20. Of Chymistry and Chymical Principles.

IT is sufficiently known, and I have partly made mention above, what a stir Natural Philoso∣phers do keep concerning the principles of Nature and natural Beings, and how different their opinions are. The Schools following Aristotle are for the Four Ele∣ments, which they believe to be simple bodies, as having no mixture in themselves, and therefore fit∣test to be principles of all other mixt or compound∣ed bodies; But my Reason cannot apprehend what they mean by simple bodies; I confess that some bodies are more mixt then others; that is, they consist of more differing parts, such as the learned call Heterogeneous; as for example, Animals consist of flesh, blood, skin, bones, muscles, nerves, tendons, gristles, and the like, all which are parts of different figures: Other bodies again are composed of such parts as are of the same na∣ture, which the learned call Homogeneous; as for ex∣ample, Water, Air, &c. whose parts have no differ∣ent figures, but are all alike each other, at least to our perception; besides, there are bodies which are more rare and subtile than others, according to the degrees

of their natural figurative motions, and the composi∣on of their parts; Nevertheless I see no reason, why those Homogeneous bodies should be called simple, and all others mixt, or composed of them; much less why they should be principles of all other natural bodies; for they derive their origine from matter, as well as the rest; so that it is onely the different composure of their parts, that makes a difference between them, proceeding from the variety of self-motion, which is the cause of all dif∣ferent figures in nature; for as several work-men join in the building of one house, and several men in the fra∣ming of one Government; so do several parts in the ma∣king or forming of one composed figure.

But they'l say, it is not the likeness of parts that makes the Four Elements to be principles of natural things; but because there are no natural bodies, besides the menti∣oned Elements that are not composed of them, as is evi∣dent in the dissolution of their parts; for example, A piece of Green wood that is burning in a Chimney, we may readily discern the Four Elements in its dissolution, out of which it is composed; for the fire discovers it self in the flame, the smoak turns into air, the water hisses and boils at the ends of the wood, and the ashes are nothing but the Element of earth: But if they have no better arguments to prove their principles, they shall not rea∣dily gain my consent; for I see no reason why wood should be composed of the Four Elements, because it burns, smoaks, hisses, and turns into ashes; Fire is none of its

natural ingredients, but a different figure, which being mixt with the parts of the wood, is an occasion that the Wood turns into ashes; neither is Water a princi∣ple of Wood; for Water is as much a figure by it self; as Wood or Fire is, which being got into the parts of the wood, and mixt with the same, is expelled by the fire, as by its opposite; but if it be a piece of dry, and not of green wood, where is then the water that boils out? Surely dry wood hath no less principles, then green wood; and as for smoak, it proves no more, that it is the Element of Air in Wood, then that Wood is the Ele∣ment of Fire; for Wood, as experience witnesses, may last in water, where it is kept from the air; and smoak is rather an effect of moisture, occasioned into such a figure by the commixture of fire.

Others, as Helmont, who derives his opinion from Thales and others of the ancient Philosophers, are on∣ly for the Element of Water; affirming, that that is the sole principle, out of which all natural things consist; for say they, the Chaos where of all things were made, was nothing else but water, which first setled into slime, and then condensed into solid earth; nay, some endeavour to prove by Chymical Experiments, that they have disposed water according to their Chymical way, so that it visibly turn'd into earth, which earth pro∣duced animals, vegetables and minerals. But put the case it were so, yet this doth not prove water to be the onely principle of all natural beings; for first, we can∣not

think, that animals, vegetables and minerals are the onely kinds of creatures in Nature; and that there are no more but them: for nature being infinitely various, may have infinite Worlds, and so infinite sorts of Crea∣tures: Next I say, that the change of water into earth, and of this again into vegetables, minerals and animals, proves no more but what our senses perceive every day, to wit, that there is a perpetual change and alteration in all natural parts, caused by corporeal self-motion, by which rare bodies change into dense, and dense into rare, wa∣ter into slime, slime into earth, earth into animals, ve∣getables and minerals, and those again into earth, earth into slime, slime into water, and so forth: But I won∣der why rational men should onely rest upon water, and go no further, since daily experience informs them, that water is changed into vapour, and vapour into air; for if water be resolveable into other bodies, it cannot be a prime cause, and consequently no principle of Nature; wherefore they had better, in my opinion, to make Air the principle of all things. 'Tis true, Water may pro∣duce many creatures, as I said before, by a compositi∣on with other, or change of its own parts; but yet I dare say, it doth kill or destroy as many, nay more, then it produces; witness vegetables and others, which Hus∣bandmen and Planters have best experience of; and though some animals live in water as their proper Ele∣ment; yet to most it is destructive, I mean, as for their particular natures; nay if men do but dwell in a moist

place, or near marrish grounds, or have too much watery humors in their bodies, they'l sooner die then otherwise. But put the case, water were a principle of Natural things, yet it must have motion, or else it would never be able to change into so many figures; and this motion must either be naturally inherent in the substance of water, or it must proceed from some exterior agent; if from an exterior agent, then this agent must either be material, or immaterial; also if all motion in Nature did proceed from pres∣sure of parts upon parts; then those parts which press others, must either have motion inherent in themselves; or if they be moved by others, we must at last proceed to something which has motion in it self, and is not moved by another, but moves all things; and if we allow this, Why may not we allow self-mo∣tion in all things? for if one part of Matter has self∣motion, it cannot be denied of all the rest: but if immaterial, it must either be God himself, or created supernatural spirits: As for God, he being immove∣able, and beyond all natural motion, cannot actually move Matter; neither is it Religious, to say, God is the Soul of Nature; for God is no part of Nature, as the soul is of the body; And immaterial spirits, be∣ing supernatural, cannot have natural attributes or actions, such as is corporeal, natural motion. Wherefore it remains, that Matter must be naturally self-moving, and consequently all parts of Nature, all being ma∣terial;

so that not onely Water, Earth, Fire, and Air, but all other natural bodies whatsoever, have natural self-motion inherent in themselves; by which it is evi∣dent, that there can be no other principle in Nature, but this self-moving Matter, and that all the rest are but effects of this onely cause.

Some are of opinion, That the three Catholick or Universal principles of Nature, are, Matter, Motion and Rest; and others with Epicure, that they are Magni∣tude, Figure and Weight; but although Matter and Motion, or rather self-moving Matter, be the onely principle of Nature; yet they are mistaken in dividing them from each other, and adding rest to the number of them, for Matter and Motion are but one thing, and cannot make different principles; aud so is figure, weight and magnitude. 'Tis true, Matter might sub∣sist without Motion, but not Motion without Matter; for there is no such thing as an immaterial Motion, but Motion must necessarily be of something; also if there be a figure, it must of necessity be a figure of some∣thing; the same may be said of magnitude and weight, there being no such thing as a mean between some∣thing and nothing, that is, between body, and no bo∣dy in Nature: If Motion were immaterial, it is be∣yond all humane capacity to conceive, how it could be abstracted from something; much more, how it could be a principle to produce a natural being, it might easier be believed, that Matter was perishable or reduceable

into nothing, then that motion, figure and magnitude should be separable from Matter, or be immaterial, as the opinion is of those who introduce a Vacuum in Na∣ture; and as for Rest, I wonder how that can be a principle of any production, change or alteration, which it self acts nothing.

Others are for Atomes and insensible particles, con∣sisting of different figures and particular natures; not otherwise united but by a bare apposition, as they call it; by which although perhaps the composed body obtains new qualities, yet still the ingredients retain each their own Nature, and in the destru∣ction of the composed body, those that are of one sort associate, and return into Fire, Water, Earth, &c. as they were before: But whatever their opinion of Atoms be, first I have heretofore declared that there can be no such things as single bodies or Atomes in Na∣ture: Next, if there were any such particles in com∣posed bodies, yet they are but parts or effects of Mat∣ter, and not principles of Nature, or Natural be∣ings.

Lastly, Chymists do constitute the principles of all natural bodies, Salt, Sulphur and Mercury. But although I am not averse from believing that those in∣gredients may be mixt with other parts of Nature in the composition of natural figures, and that (especially) Salt may be extracted out of many Creatures; yet that it should be the constitutive principle of all other na∣tural

parts or figures, seems no ways conformable to truth; for salt is no more then other effects of Nature; and although some extractions may convert some sub∣stances into salt figures, and some into others, (for Art by the leave of her Mistress, Nature, doth oftentimes occasion an alteration of natural Creatures into artifi∣cial) yet these extractions cannot inform us how those natural creatures are made, and of what ingredients they consist; for they do not prove, that the same Creatures are composed of Salt, or mixt with Salt; but cause onely those substances which they extract, to change into saline figures, like as others do convert them into Chymical spirits; all which are but Herma∣phroditical effects, that is, between natural and arti∣ficial; Just as a Mule partakes both of the nature or figure of a Horse, and an Ass: Nevertheless, as Mules are very beneficial for use, so many Chymical effects, provided they be discreetly and seasonably u∣sed; for Minerals are no less beneficial to the life and health of Man, then Vegetables, and Vegetables may be as hurtful and destructive as Minerals by an un∣seasonable and unskilful application; besides, there may be Chymical extracts made of Vegetables as well as of Minerals, but these are bestused in the height or extremity of some diseases, like as cordial waters in fainting fits; and some Chymical spirits are as far beyond cordial waters, as fire is beyond smoak; which cannot be but dangerous, and unfit to be used; except it be

to encounter opposite extreams. By extreams, I mean not the extreams of Nature, but the height of a distem∣per, when it is grown so far, that it is upon point of de∣stroying or dissolving a particular animal figure; for Nature, being infinite, has no extreams; neither in her substance, nor actions; for she has nothing that is opposite to Matter, neither is there any such thing as most or least in Nature, she being infinite, and all her actions are ballanced by their opposites; as for example, there is no dilation but hath opposite to it contraction; no condensation but has its opposite, viz. rarefaction; no composition but hath its opposite, division; no gravity without levity; no grossness without purity; no animate without inanimate; no regularity without irregularity: All which produces a peaceable, orderly, and wise Government in Natures Kingdom, which wise Artists ought to imitate.

But you may say, How is it possible, That there can be a peaceable and orderly Government, where there are so many contrary or opposite actions; for contraries make war, not peace?

I answer: Although the actions of Nature are op∣posite, yet Nature, in her own substance is at peace, because she is one and the same; that is, one material body, and has nothing without her self to oppose and cross her; neither is she subject to a general change, so as to alter her own substance from being Matter, for she is Infinite and Eternal: but because she is self∣moving,

and full of variety of figures, this variety can∣not be produced without variety of actions, no not without opposition; which opposition is the cause, that there can be no extreams in particulars; for it ballances each action, so that it cannot run into infinite, which otherwise would breed a horrid confusion in Na∣ture.

And thus much of Principles: Concerning the par∣ticulars of Chymical preparations, I being not versed in that Art, am not able to give my judgment thereof, neither do I understand their terms and expressions: as first, what Chymists mean by Fixation; for there's nothing in Nature that can properly be called fixt, be∣cause Nature, and all her parts, are perpetually self∣moving; onely Nature cannot be altered from being material, nor from being dependant upon God.

Neither do I apprehend what some mean by the unlocking of bodies, unless they understand by it, a sepa∣ration of natural parts proper for artificial uses; nei∣ther can natural effects be separated by others, any o∣therwise but occasionally; so that some parts may be an occasion of such or such alterations in other parts. But I must say this, that according to humane sense and reason, there is no part or particle in Nature which is not alterable, by reason Nature is in a perpetual moti∣on, and full of variety. 'Tis true, some bodies, as Gold and Mercury, seem to be unalterable from their particular natures; but this onely appears thus to our

senses, because their parts are more fixt and retentive then others, and no Art has been found out as yet which could alter ther proper and particular figures, that is, untie and dissolve, or rather cause an alteration of their corporeal retentive motions, that bind them into so fixt and consistent a body; but all that is mixt with them, has hitherto been found too weak for the altera∣tion of ther inherent motions; Nevertheless, this doth not prove, that they are not altogether unalterable; for though Art cannot do it, yet Nature may; but it is an argument that they are not composed of straying A∣tomes, or most minute particles; for not to mention what I have often repeated before, that there cannot be such most minute bodies in Nature, by reason Na∣ture knows of no extreams, it is altogether improbable, nay, impossible, that wandering corpuscles should be the cause of such fixt effects, and by their association constitute such indissoluble masses or clusters, as some do conceive, which they call primary concretions; for there is no such thing as a primary concretion or com∣position in Nature; onely there are several sorts and degrees of motions, and several sorts of compositions; and as no particular creature can know the strength of motion, so neither can it know the degrees of strength in particular natural bodies. Wherefore although composition and division of parts are general motions, and some figures may be more composed then others, that is, consist of more or fewer parts then others; yet

there is none that hath not a composition of parts: The truth is, there is nothing prime or principal amongst the effects of Nature, but onely the cause from which they are produced, which is self-moving Matter, which is above particular effects: yet Nature may have more ways then our particular reason can apprehend; and therefore it is not to be admired that Camphor, and the like bodies do yield differing effects, according to the different occasions that make them move thus or thus; for though changes and alterations of particu∣lars may be occasioned by others; yet they move by their own corporeal figurative motions; as it is evident by the power of fire, which makes other bodies move or change their parts and figures, not by its own transforming motion, but onely by giving an occasion to the inherent figurative motions of those bodies, which by imitating the motions of fire, change into such or such figures by their own proper, innate and inherent mo∣tions; otherwise if the alteration of combustible bodies proceeded from fire, they would all have the like mo∣tions, which is contradicted by experience. I will not deny, but there is as much variety in occasioning, as there is in acting; for the imitation is according to the object, but the object is not the immediate agent, but onely an occasional efficient; so that, according to my opinion, there is no such difference, as the learned make between Patient and Agent, when they call the exte∣rior occasional cause; as for example, Fire, the Agent;

and the combustible body the Patient; for they con∣ceive that a body thrown into fire, acts nothing at all, but onely in a passive way suffers the fire to act upon it, according to the degree of its own, to wit, the fires strength, which sense and reason perceives other∣wise; for to pass by what I mentioned before, that those bodies on which they suppose fire doth work, change according not to the fires, but their own inhe∣rent figurative motions; it is most certain, that if Na∣ture and all her parts be self-moving, which regular reason cannot deny; and if Self-motion be corporeal, then every part of Nature must of necessity move by its own motion; for no body can impart motion to ano∣ther body, without imparting substance also; and though particular motions in particular bodies may change infinite ways, yet they cannot quit those bodies, so as to leave them void and destitute of all motion, be∣cause Matter and Motion are but one thing; and there∣fore though fire be commixed with the parts of the fuel, yet the fuel alters by its own motion, and the fire doth but act occasionally; and so do Chymical spi∣rits or extracts, which may cause a separation, and alter some bodies as readily as fire doth; for they are a cer∣tain kind of fire, to wit, such as is called a dead or li∣quid fire; for a flaming fire, although it be fluid, yet it is not liquid: The same may be said of the Antimo∣nial-Cup. For it is not probable to sense and reason, there should be certain invisible little bodies, that pass

out of the Cup into the liquor, and cause such effects, no more then there are magnetical effluviums issuing out of the Load-stone towards Iron, there being many causes, which neither impart nor lose any thing in the production of their effects; but the liquor that is with∣in the Antimonial Cup, does imitate the corporeal figu∣rative motions of the Cup, and so produces the same effects, as are proper to Antimony, upon other bodies or parts of Nature. In the same manner does the Blood-stone stop bleeding; not by imparting invisible Atomes or Rays to the affected parts, (or else if it were long worn about ones body, it would be wasted, at least alter its proper figure and vertue) but by being imi∣tated by the corporeal figurative motions of the distem∣pered parts. Thus many other examples could be alledged to prove, that natural motions work such or such effects within their own parts, without receiving any from without, that is, by imitation, and not by reception of Motion. By which it is evident, that properly there is no passive, or suffering body in Nature, except it be the inanimate part of Matter, which in its own nature is moveless or destitute of motion, and is carried along with, and by the animate parts of Mat∣ter: However, although inanimate Matter has no motion inherent in it self, as it is inanimate; yet it is so closely mixt with the animate parts, that it can∣not be considered without motion, much less be sepa∣rable from it; and therefore although it acts not of

it self, yet it acts by vertue of the animate parts of Matter.

Next: I cannot conceive what some Chymists mean, when they call those Principles or Elements, which, they say, composed bodies consist of, distinct substances; for though they may be of different figures, yet they are not of different substances; because there is but one onely substance in Nature, which is Matter, whose se∣veral actions cause all the variety in Nature. But if all the parts of Natural bodies should be called Principles or Elements, then there would be infinite Principles in Nature, which is impossible; because there can be no more but one principle, which is, self-moving Matter; and although several Creatures, by the help of fire, may be reduced or dissolved into several diffe∣rent particles, yet those particles are not principles, much less simple bodies, or else we might say, as well, that ashes are a principle of Wood: Neither are they created anew, because they are of another form or figure then when composed into one concrete body; for there's nothing that is material, which is not pre-existent in Nature; no nor figure, motion, or the like, all being material, although not always subject to our hu∣mane sensitive perception; for the variation of the cor∣poreal figurative motions blindeth our particular senses, that we cannot perceive them, they being too subtile to be discerned either by Art or humane perception. The truth is, if we could see the corporeal figurative mo∣tions

of natural creatures, and the association and di∣vision of all their parts, we should soon find out the causes which make them to be such or such particular natural effects; but Nature is too wise to be so easily known by her particulars.

Wherefore Chymists need not think they can cre∣ate any thing anew; for they cannot challenge to them∣selves a divine power, neither can there be any such thing as a new Creation in Nature, no not of an A∣tome; Nor can they annihilate any thing; they 〈◊〉〈◊〉 sooner waste their Estates, then reduce the least par∣ticle of Matter into nothing; and though they make waste of some parts of natural bodies, yet those are but changes into other figures, there being a perpe∣tual inspiration and expiration, that is, composition and division of parts; but composition is not a new Creation, nor division an annihilation; and though they produce new forms, as they imagine; yet those forms, though they be new to them, are not new in Nature; for all that is material, has been existent in Nature from all Eternity; so that the combination of parts cannot produce anything that is not already in Nature. Indeed the generation of new figures, seems to me much like the generation of new motions; which would put God to a perpetual Creation, and argue that he was not able to make Nature or Mat∣ter perfect at first, or that he wanted imployment. But, say they, it is not Matter that is created anew, but

onely figures or forms. I answer: If any one can shew me a figure without Matter, I shall be willing to believe it; but I am confident Nature cannot do that, much less Art, which is but a particular effect; for as Matter cannot be without Figure, so neither can Fi∣gure be without Matter, no more then body without parts, or parts without body; and if so, no figure or form can be created without Matter, there being no such thing as a substanceless form. Chymists should but consider their own particular persons; as whether they were generated anew, or had been in Nature be∣fore they were got of their Parents; if they had not been pre-existent in Nature, they would not be natu∣ral, but supernatural Creatures; because they would not subsist of the same matter, as other Creatures do. Truly, Matter being Infinite, how some new mate∣rial creatures could be created without some parts of this Infinite Matter, is not conceivable by humane sense and reason; for infinite admits of no addition; but if there could be an addition, it would presuppose an an∣nihilation, so that at the same time when one part is annihilating or perishing, another must succeed by a new creation, which is a meer Paradox.

But that which puzles me most, is, how those sub∣stances, which they call Tria Prima, and princi∣ples of natural things, can be generated anew; for if the principles be generated anew, the effects must be so too; and since they, according to their supposition,

are Catholick or Universal principles, all natural ef∣fects must have their origine from them, and be, like their principles, created continually anew; which how it be possible, without the destruction of Nature, is beyond my reason to conceive. Some endeavour to prove, by their Artificial Experiments, that they have and can produce such things out of natural bodies, which never were pre-existent in them; as for exam∣ple, Glass out of Vegetables, without any addition of forreign parts onely, by the help of fire. To which I answer: That, in my opinion, the same Glass was as much pre-existent in the matter of those Vegetables, and the Fire, and in the power of their corporeal figura∣tive motions, as any other figure whatsoever; other∣wise it would never have been produced; nay, not onely Glass, but millions of other figures might be ob∣tained from those parts, they being subject to infinite changes; for the actions of self-moving Matter are so infinitely various, that according to the mixture, or composition and division of parts, they can produce what figures they please; not by a new Creation, but on∣ly a change or alteration of their own parts; and though some parts act not to the production of such or such fi∣gures; yet we cannot say, that those figures are not in Nature, or in the power of corporeal, figurative self∣motion; we might say, as well, that a man cannot go, when he sits; or has no motion, when he sleeps; as believe, that it is not in the power of Nature to pro∣duce

such or such effects or actions, when they are not actually produced; for, as I said before, although Nature be but one material substance, yet there are in∣finite mixtures of infinite parts, produced by infinite self-motion, infinite ways; in so much, that seldom any two Creatures, even those of one sort, do exactly re∣semble each other.

But some may say, How is it possible, That figure, being all one with Matter, can change; and matter remain still the same without any change or altera∣tion?

I answer: As well as an animal body can put it self into various and different postures, without any change of its interior animal figure; for though figure cannot subsist without matter, nor matter without figure, ge∣nerally considered; yet particular parts of matter are not bound to certain particular figures: Matter in its ge∣neral nature remains always the same, and cannot be changed from being Matter, but by the power of self∣motion it may change from being such or such a par∣ticular figure: for example, Wood is as much matter as Stone; but it is not of the same figure, nor has it the same interior innate motions which Stone hath, be∣cause it has not the like composition of parts, as other creatures of other figures have; and though some fi∣gures be more constant or lasting then others, yet this does not prove, that they are not subject to changes as well as those that alter daily, nay, every moment; much

less, that they are without motion; for not all motions are dividing or dissolving; but some are retentive, some composing, some attractive, some expulsive, some contractive, some dilative, and infinite other sorts of motions, as 'tis evident by the infinite variety which appears in the differing effects of Nature: Neverthe∣less it is no consequence, that, because the effects are dif∣ferent, they must also have different principles; For first, all effects of Nature are material; which proves, they have but one principle, which is the onely infinite Matter: Next, they are all self-moving; which proves, that this material principle has self-mo∣tion; for without self-motion there would be no va∣riety or change of figures, it being the nature of self∣motion to be perpetually acting.

Thus Matter and Self-motion, being inseparably united in one infinite body, which is self-moving ma∣terial Nature, is the onely cause of all the infinite effects that are produced in Nature, and not the Aristoteleon Elements, or Chymists Tria prima, which sense and reason perceives to be no more but effects; or else if we should call all those Creatures principles, which by the power of their own inherent motions, change into o∣ther figures, we shall be forced to make infinite prin∣ciples, and so confound principles with effects; and after this manner, that which is now an effect, will become a principle; and what is now a principle, will become an effect; which will lead our sense and reason

into a herrid confusion and labyrinth of ignorance.

Wherefore I will neither follow the Opinions of the Ancient, nor of our Moderns in this point, but search the truth of Nature, by the light of regular reason; for I perceive that most of our modern Wri∣tings are not fill'd with new Inventions of their own, but like a lumber, stuff'd with old Commodities, botch'd and dress'd up anew, contain nothing but what has been said in former ages. Nor am I of the opinion of our Divine Philosophers, who mince Phi∣losophy and Divinity, Faith and Reason, together; and count it Irreligious, if not Blasphemy, to assert any other principles of Nature, then what they (I will not say, by head and shoulders) draw out of the Scripture, especially out of Genesis, to evince the finiteness, and beginning of Nature; when as Moses doth onely describe the Creation of this World, and not of Infinite Nature: But as Pure natural Phi∣losophers do not meddle with Divinity, or things Su∣pernatural, so Divines ought not to intrench upon Natural Philosophy.

Neither are Chymists the onely natural Philoso∣phers, because they are so much tied to the Art of Fire, and regulate or measure all the effects of Nature according to their Artificial Experiments; which do delude rather then inform their sense and reason; and although they pretend to a vast and greater knowledg then all the rest, yet they have not dived so deep into

Nature yet, as to perceive that she is full of sense and reason, which is life and knowledg; and in parts, or∣ders parts proper to parts, which causes all the various motions, figures and changes in the infinite parts of Nature; Indeed, no Creature, that has its reason re∣gular, can almost believe, that such wise and orderly actions should be done either by chance, or by stray∣ing Atomes, which cannot so constantly change and exchange parts, and mix and join so properly, and to such constant effects as are apparent in Nature. And as for Galenists, if they believe that some parts of Nature connot leave or pass by other parts, to join, meet, or encounter others, they are as much in an er∣ror as Chymists, concerning the power of fire and fur∣nace; for it is most frequently observed thus amongst all sorts of Animals; and if amongst Animals, I know no reason but all other kinds and sorts of Creatures may do the like; nay, both sense and reason inform us they do, as appears by the several and proper actions of all sorts of drugs, as also Minerals and Elements, and the like; so that none ought to wonder how it is possible, that medicines that must pass through digestions in the body, should, neglecting all other parts, shew them∣selves friendly onely to the brain or kidnies, or the like parts; for if there be sense and reason in Nature, all things must act wisely and orderly, and not confused∣ly; and though Art, like an Emulating Ape, strives to imitate Nature, yet it is so far from producing natural

figures, that at best, it rather produces Monsters in∣stead of natural effects; for it is like the Painter, who drew a Rose instead of a Lion; nevertheless Art is as active as any other natural Creature, and doth never want imployment; for it is like all other parts, in a perpe∣tual self-motion; and although the interior actions of all other parts do not appear to our senses, yet they may be perceived by regular reason; for what sense wants, rea∣son supplies, which oftener rectifies the straying and erring senses, then these do reason, as being more pure, subtile and free from labouring on the inanimate parts of Matter, then sense is, as I have often declared; which proves, that reason is far beyond sense; and this appears also in Chymistry, which yet is so much for sensitive experiments; for when the effects do not readily follow, according to our intentions, reason is fain to consider and enquire into the causes that hinder or obstruct the success of our designs. And if reason be above sense, then Speculative Philosophy ought to be preferred before the Experimental, because there can no reason be given for any thing without it. I will not say, that all Arts have their first origine from Rea∣son; for what we name chance, does often present to the sensitive perception such things which the rational does afterwards take into consideration; but my mean∣ing is, that for the most part, Reason leads and directs the ways of Art; and I am of opinion, that Contem∣plative Philosophy is the best Tutoress, and gives the

surest instructions to Art, and amongst the rest to the Art of Chymistry, which no doubt is very profi∣table to man many several ways, and very soveraign in many desperate diseases, if discreetly and moderately used; but if Chymical medicines should be so com∣monly applied as others, they would sooner kill, then cure; and if Paracelsus was as frequently practised as Galen, it would be as bad as the Plague: Wherefore Chymical Medicines are to be used as the extreme Un∣ction in desperate cases, and that with great moderation and discretion.