face of a pond be ftruck with a ftick, numerous globules of water roll over without breaking, whilst they pafs feveral yards from the place where the water was ftruck. In these cases of apparent repulfion I fuppofe that every drop of water furrounded with air becomes globular by the cohesion of its own particles, and unless its weight or contact with other furfaces be fufficient to overcome its cohefion, and difplace the air adhering both to the drop and to the furface which it falls upon, it retains its form and cannot unite with them.

Soap bubbles will roll over or rebound from a carpet, though they be filled with fmoke, which makes them heavier than when blown with clear air. Alfo pins may be thrust through them, and even the small end of a tobacco pipe, so as to blow a smaller bubble within the larger without its immediately breaking: but if a bubble fall upon a smooth plain furface, it instantly breaks.

I have fometimes been amufed with blowing bubbles with inflammable air, and by attaching to them a fmall circle of paper and fine thread or raw filk, could hold them fufpended in the air for a confiderable time. Another amufing experiment was to fix to the inflammable airbubble a finall flip of nitred paper, to the fide of which and near the top a grain of gunpowder was annexed. The fmall end of the

paper

paper was lighted, and burning up to the gunpowder during its afcent, it exploded, and at the fame inftant fired the inflammable air.

Two corks, or other light bodies, fwimming on water, and having been previously moistened, feem to attract each other. The fame thing happens if they are not moistened, but they depress the furface of the water by lying upon it when the water does not wholly adhere to them: but if one be moift and the other dry, they recede from each other; and if a dry one be driven against the fide of the veffel containing the water, it is repelled in a manner very much resembling the reaction of elastic bodies. In both the cafes where the corks approach towards each other, the furface of the water is raised or depreffed by the adhesion of a circle of water to the cork, which also attracts other particles till the gravitation and cohesion are equally balanced as in capillary tubes; and when these circles of attracted water meet, and that in parallel fituations, they attract each other, and uniting, endeavour to form one circle, as two bubbles or drops of water unite and form one larger; this brings the corks, together, which would also unite and form one larger cork were they not prevented by the strength of cohesion between their own particles. But when one raises and the other depreffes the water, each cork attracts

its water from the level furface to complete its circle, the level furface being nearer to each circle than they are to each other, and which may be attracted without either elevating the one or depreffing the other. This water, therefore, comes between and pushes them afunder.

In these inftances, repulfion is accounted for by the attraction of intervening fluids, and perhaps the elasticity of the air, electricity, and all other elastic fluids may be explained in the fame manner, that is, by fuppofing the mixture of a fyftem of fluids of which fome are capable of permeating glafs and other folids, as light, heat, magnetism, &c. fo that when air for inftance is condensed in a veffel, the finer fluids are forced through the fides, and fuffer the particles of air to approach nearer together. Or if the electrical fluid is forced upon one furface of glass, a finer fluid or fyftem of finer fluids, which constitute its elafticity, are preffed out and rarify the other uninfulated furface: but without new and decifive experiments, this hypothefis will not be easily adopted. "Yet, if theory can be fo framed "as really to fuit all the facts, it has all the " evidence of truth that the nature of things can "admit. And even very lame and imperfect "theories are fufficient to fuggeft ufeful experi

ments, which ferve to correct those theories, "and give birth to others more perfect."

This quotation, from fo great an authority as Dr. Priestley, furnishes an excellent apology for the imperfect attempts of

T might be urged, as a proof of our poffeffing a fuperfluity of good Plays in our language, that one of our beft dramatic writers is very generally difregarded. But whatever conclufion may be drawn from this fact, it will not be eafy to free the public from the fufpicion of caprice, while it continues to idolize Shakefpeare, and to neglect an author not often much.

inferior,

inferior, and fometimes nearly equal to that wonderful poet. Maffinger's fate has indeed been hard, far beyond the common topics of the infelicity of genius. He was not merely denied the fortune for which he laboured, and the fame which he merited; a ftill more cruel circumstance has attended his productions: literary pilferers have built their reputation on his obfcurity, and the popularity of their ftolen beauties has diverted the public attention from the excellent original.

An attempt was made in favour of this injured poet, in 1761, by a new edition of his works, attended with a critical differtation on the old English Dramatifts, in which, though compofed with spirit and elegance, there is little to be found respecting Maffinger. Another edition appeared in 1773, but the poet remained unexamined. Perhaps Maffinger is ftill unfortunate in his vindicator.

The fame irregularity of plot, and difregard of rules, appear in Maffinger's productions, as in thofe of his cotemporaries. On this fubject, Shakespeare has been fo well defended, that it is unneceffary to add any arguments in vindication of our poet. There is every reason to fuppofe, that Maffinger did not neglect the ancient rules from ignorance, for he appears to be one of our most learned writers (notwithstanding the

infipid