that it must have settled it self into the figure of a broad Spheroid, and not of an oblong

one.

But yet I demonftrated, that fuppofing the Earth to have been partly fluid and partly dry, as it is at prefent, that even in that cafe, the Figure of the Earth must be Spheroidical, because we obferve that the Land is very nearly of the fame Figure with the Sea, (only raised a little higher, that it may not be overflowed) and compofes with it the fame folid, but the Sea being fluid will fettle its felf into juft fuch a figure, as if the whole Globe were fluid, that is (as I have demonftrated) its furface will be the fame with that of a broad Spheroid; and therefore the Land which is of the fame figure will be fo likewife. And thus I hope I have prov'd, that whether we fuppofe the Earth to have been at first entirely fluid, or to have been compos'd of parts fome folid and fome fluid, that from either of thefe fuppofitions it follows, that the Figure of the Earth must be directly contrary to what the Theorift affigns.

But (fays our Author) if the Earth was from the beginning in this prefent form, firm and folid, (as it is now) Rocky and Mountainous, then the question is, how the Parts or Regions of the Earth about the Equator, could be raised above a Spherical figure or into an oblate Spheroid; fuppofe then the waters raised by the circumvolution of the Earth,

Earth, how was the Terra firma raised, or how could it be raised by that or any fuch caufe. Thefe queftions (fays he) are no matter of difficulty to the Theorist, who fupposes the first Earth to have covered the Waters, and to have taken their fhape (whatever it was) as upon a mould.

However eafy they may be to the Theorist I affure him that they are much easier to me, who suppose that God Almighty raised the Land at the beginning, when he form'd the Earth into the Figure it has at prefent, which otherwife could never have rifen of its felf. The dry Land therefore was raised and formed into a Spheroidical Figure by its wife Creator, on purpose that it might not be overflow'd by the Sea at the Equator, which (as I have prov'd) muft of neceffity have been higher there than at the Poles; and therefore if the Land at the Equator had remain'd in a Spherical Figure, no higher than that which is at the Poles, the Sea muft of neceffity have rifen above it, and fpread its felf upon it like an Inundation. It was therefore wifely order'd by the Divine Providence, that not only the Sea but the Land alfo fhould be form'd into a broad Spheroidical Figure, on purpose that it might not be overflow'd with Waters.

That the Readers might obferve the Theorift's great skill in drawing of confequences, and how well his Oval-figur'd Earth was fup

ported

ported with reafons; I gave them his argument thus, All bodies by reafon of the Earths diurnal rotation, do endeavour to recede from the Axis of their motion, but by reafon of the preffure the Air, and the straightness of the Orb, they cannot recede from the Axis of their motion, therefore they will move towards the Poles where they will come nearer to the Axis of their motion, that is, Because all bodies endeavour to recede from the Axis of their motion, therefore they will endeavour to go to the Axis of their motion. In anfwer to this, the Defender fays, that the Theorift afferted, that all Bodies did conari à centro fui motus recedere, which I have render'd, endeavour to recede from the Axis of their motion; and by changing the word Center into Axis, of plain fenfe (fays he) I have made non-fense; and then he is fo free as to own, that the conclufion will follow from my own words, but not from those of the Theorist. I own, that I chang'd the word Center into Axis, not carelefly but willfully, with a defign not of making it non-fenfe, but better sense than it was before. For we never fay that a Sphere turns round about its own Center, for that would be plain non-sense indeed, but round about its own Axis; for we cannot fo properly fay, that a Body moves round a Center as round an Axis, unless we abstract from its Magnitude, and conceive it as a point. The reafon is plain, for when any Body revolves, it is evident that every point of it

which does not lye in the Plane of another points Orbit, muft defcribe a different Periphery, which must have alfo a different Center, fo that all thofe Centers are placed in one line, which is therefore call'd the Axis of the Bodies motion; about which, Bodies are faid to revolve much more properly than about a Center: however, this Author fays, that by changing the word Center into Axis, of plain fenfe I have made non-fenfe. This Gentleman feems to be fo extreamly paradoxical, that I have often fufpected he must have a different method of judging what is fenfe or non-sense from other people, if he has it, it were but fair to fhew it, that we may know when things will be agreeable to his Criterion, or when they will not; if he thinks it non-fenfe to fay, that Bodies do endeavour to recede from the Axis of their motion, it is my comfort to have fome good Mathematicians on my fide, who think otherwise: I need only mention one of them, whose very name is enough to defend me, viz. The greatest Geometer and Philosopher of the Age, who uses this way of speaking very often in his Philifophie Naturalis principia Mathematica, for which he needs go no further than page 8. where it is faid, Gyrantium partes omnes conantur recedere ab Axe motus.

But however, let us reaffume the word Center, and fee if the argument will appear more plaufible, or feem to conclude better

than

than it did by using the word Axis: All Bodies by reafon of the Earths diurnal rotation, do endeavour to recede from the Center of their mo tion, but by reafon of the preffure of the Air and the ftraitness of the Orb, they cannot recede from the Center of their motion, therefore they will go towards the Poles, and move in a Circle where they will be nearer the Center of their motion. I hope I have not now chang'd his words, but have delivered his true meaning; I leave the Reader to judge if it is not excellently well concluded, and if the connexion be not fo evident, that it needs no Comment to make it

out.

Now fuppofing, that the Theorist had reafoned well all this time about the Earth, and had deduced its true Figure from its truè causes; yet I demonftrated, that all this will not make Rivers run from the Poles to the Equator, for a reason that I will take the liberty here to repeat, that we may compare it with the Defenders anfwer; The demonftra

tion is this:

The Rotation of the Earth round its own Axis being ftill the fame, the cause which thrust the water from the Equator to the Poles, will alfo continue the fame and invariable, and by confequence it will hinder the water from returning again towards the Equator; and therefore, fuppofing that the Earth was formed into an Oval-figure, yet there could not be any courfe for the Rivers; U

for