|
s might no doubt be cited, but let us suppose that none could. Are we therefore to infer that in these cases the poker drew the fire up? A new law of nature would be indicated if this were so; and a new law of nature is worth learning. But when due inquiry is made, it appears that there is no such law-as unfortunately we might have expected. Our correspondent, who found that when he put the poker across the fire it drew up, is unquestionably, but an unskillful fireman. He puts on coals, and pokes and stirs the fire, unconscious of the fact that this is just the way to put a fire out. When the fire is all but hopelessly reduced by his unskillful measures, he puts the poker across the top bar. According to old-fashioned superstitions, he makes the sign of the cross across the fire-place, and the fire, in which until now there seemed to have been some evil spirit (that is what people mean when they say ' the devil's in the fire'), is purified from the unclean presence and
212
begins to burn up. That would have been the old-fashioned interpretation of the change; but science takes another view of the matter. It sees reason to believe that the change took place simply because the disturbance to which the fire had before been exposed was bad for it. Putting the poker across the top bar meant letting the fire alone, and giving it a chance to burn up.
Singularly enough, I had occasion, when the last sentence was just finished, to leave my study. When I came back, an hour later, I found that my fire, which in the meantime must very nearly have gone out, had been recoaled--and the housemaid, or whoever had attended to it, had, after the fashion of her tribe, put the poker across the top bar. The fire was not burning very brightly--on the contrary, it seemed inclined to go out. Yet, rashly daring, I put the poker down--from scientific principles I object to seeing bright metal smoked and dulled--and went on with my work, intending, if the fire went out, to call some one in to light it again. However, it so chanced that after the poker was put do, on, the fire began to burn pretty brightly, and as I write there is every promise of a good fire. Am I to infer that taking the poker from across the top bar made the fire burn up ? Of course, the real fact was, that when the fire seemed dull it was really making steady progress, and whether I had taken down the poker, or supplemented its salutary action by putting another poker across the top bar, would not have made one particle of difference.
|
