To prove it, he gives an Example in _Fig._ III. of Buildings upon an Hill; shewing, that the Two Sides of the Hill will only bear the same Number of Houses, that may stand in the Line at the Base. This is foreign to the Question, of how much Grain, or how many Trees, the Hill will produce. For Vegetables, being fed by the Earth, require much more of its Surface to nourish them, than is necessary for them to stand on; but Buildings require no more of the Surface but Room to stand on: Therefore no such Argument, taken from Buildings, can be applied to Vegetables. This Argument of Mr. _Bradley_’s gives no more Satisfaction to the Question about producing of Vegetables, than a Grazier would do, being asked, how many Oxen a certain Pasture-ground would maintain, if he should answer, by satisfying you with the Number of Churches which might stand thereon. The like Answer, in effect, may be given to the Argument in _Fig._ IV. of the Pales; only he has forgot to shew, that to mound over the Hill would require double the Rails, or double the Hedge-wood (except Stakes) as to mound the Base; if it did not, the Hill would be yet of the more Value, because thereon more Surface might be fenced in at less Expence. In his _Fig._ II. he gives no good Reason why the Hill should not bear twice the Number of Trees as the Base can do; for there is as much Room for Two hundred Trees on the Hill, as for One hundred on the Base, because he allows the Surface to be double to that of the Base. He ought to measure the Distances of the Trees on the Hill, by a Line parallel to the Surface they grow on, as well as he does the Distances of those below. And suppose the Row at the Base, together with the Surface they grow on, were rais’d up, so that it should become parallel to half the Row on the Hill, would not the Trees in the Base Row be twice as near to one another as the Trees in the Hill Row are? And suppose a Line had been ty’d from the Tops of all the lower Trees, before the Row was so rais’d up at one End, and then, after the Situation of the Row was so alter’d, if by this Line the Trees should be pull’d from being perpendicular to the Surface they grow on, and made to stand oblique to that, and perpendicular to the Horizon, as the upper Trees are; would the Distances of the Trees from one another be alter’d by this Change of Posture? No, for their Bottoms would be at the same Distances, because not removed; and their Tops, because the same Line holds them, at the same Distances in both Postures.