The other Instrument, for Fetching up water from the depth of the sea, is (as appears by Figure 2.) a square woodden Bucket C, whose bottoms EE, are so contrived, that as the weight A, sinks the Iron B, (to which the Bucket C, is fastned by two handles DD, on the ends of which are the moveable bottoms or Valves EE,) and thereby draws down the Bucket, the resistance of the water keeps up the Bucket in the posture C; whereby the water hath, all the while it is descending, a clear passage through; whereas, as soon as the Bucket is pulled upwards by the Line F, the resistance of the water to that motion beats the Bucket downward, and keeps it in the posture G, whereby the Included water is preserved from getting out, and the Ambient water kept from getting in.
By the advantage of which Vessel, it may be known, whether sea water be Salter at and towards the bottom, then at or near the top: Likewise, whether in some places of the sea, any sweet water is to be found at the bottom; the Affirmative whereof is to be met with in the East Indian Voyages of the industrious John Hugh Van Linsckoten, who page 16 of that Book, as 'tis Englished, records, that in the Persian Gulph, about the Island Barem, or Baharem, they fetch up with certain Vessels (which he describes not) water out of the sea, from under the salt-water, four or five fathom deep, as sweet, as any Fountain water.
Of the Judgement of some of the English Astronomers, touching the difference between two learned men, about an Observation made of the First of the two late Comets.
By Telescopical Stars are understood such, as are not seen, but by the help of a Telescope.
Whereas notice has been taken in Num. 6. of these Transactions, that there was some difference between those two deservedly celebrated Philosophers, Monsieur Hevelius and Monsieur Auzout, concerning an Observation, made by the former of them, on the 8/18 of February 1665. & that thereupon some Eminent English Astronomers, considering the importance of the dispute, had undertaken the examination thereof; it will, 'tis conceived, not be unacceptable to such, as saw those Papers, to be informed, what has been done and discerned by them in that matter. They having therefore compared the Printed Writings of the two Dissenters, and withall consulted the observations made with Telescopes at home, by some of the most intelligent Astronomers amongst them, who have attentively observed the Position of that Comet to the Telescopical stars, that lay in its way; Do thereupon Joyntly conclude, that, whatever that Appearance was, which was seen near the First Star of Aries, by Monsieur Hevelius (the truth of whose relation concerning the same, they do in no wise question) the said Comet did not come neer that Star in the left Ear of Aries, where the said M. Hevelius supposes it to have passed, but took its course neer the Bright Star in its Left Horn, according to Bayers Tables. And since that the Observations of judicious both French, Italian, & Dutch Astronomers (as many of them, as are come to the knowledge of the English) do in the main fully agree with theirs, they do not at all doubt, but that, there being such an unanimous
consent in what has been just now declared, & the Controversie being about Matter of fact, wherein Authority, Number, and Reputation must cast the Ballance, Mons. Hevelius, who is as well known for his Ingenuity, as Learning, will joyn and acquiesce in that sentiment.