ne ullum quidem Cærulei coloris vestigium apparebit, sed instar aquæ puræ putæ fontanæ limpidam claramque aspicientibus se præbebit. Porro si hanc phialam vitream versus locum magis umbrosum direxeris, totus humor gratissimum virorem referet; si adhuc umbrosioribus locis, subrubrum, & sic pro rerum objectarum conditione, mirum dictu, colorem mutabit; in tenebris verò vel in vase opaco posita, Cæruleum colorem suum resumet._ [17] Kircher. Art. Mag. lucis & umbræ, _lib. 1. part. 3._ In this passage we may take notice of the following Particulars. And first, he calls it a White _Mexican_ Wood, whereas (not to mention that _Mornardes_ informs us that it is brought out of _Nova Hispania_) the Wood that we have met with in several places, and employ'd as _Lignum Nephriticum_, was not White, but for the most part of a much Darker Colour, not unlike that of the Sadder Colour'd Wood of Juniper. 'Tis true, that _Monardes_ himself also says, that the Wood is White; and it is affirm'd, that the Wood which is of a Sadder Colour is Adulterated by being Imbu'd with the Tincture of a Vegetable, in whose Decoction it is steep'd. But having purposely enquir'd of the Eminentest of our _English_ Druggists, he peremptorily deny'd it. And indeed, having consider'd some of the fairest Round pieces of this Wood that I could meet with in these Parts, I had Opportunity to take notice that in one or two of them it was the External part of the Wood that was White, and the more Inward part that was of the other Colour, the contrary of which would probably have appear'd, if the Wood had been Adulterated after the afore-mention'd manner. And I have at present by me a piece of such Wood, which for about an Inch next the Bark is White, and then as it were abruptly passes to the above-mention'd Colour, and yet this Wood by the Tincture, it afforded us in Water, appears to have its Colour'd part Genuine enough; for as for the White part, it appears upon tryal of both at once, much less enrich'd with the tingent Property.