text:
Page:Things Seen In Holland (1912).djvu/248

 Le Comte, already mentioned in connection with the Rijks Museum “Huis Lambert van Meerten.”

Holland, being a little country, cannot support its musicians, and so it is that many of them emigrate to occupy leading positions in all the orchestras of the world. We have among us Johannes Wolff, Morris Sons, Jan Mulder, R. Lohman, and Mossel, the last named residing in Manchester. Van Rooij, the Dutch singer, is well known at Covent Garden. With us are also several Dutch painters—Sir Lawrence Alma Tadema, who hails from Dronrijp, Mathias Maris, W. L. Bruckman, Nico Jungman, Cossaar, and A. van Anrooij. As an actor De Vries has made a reputation in England.

The Netherlands possess an army composed of ten regiments (afdeeling) of Infantry, three regiments of Hussars, one


text:
Page:Things Seen In Holland (1912).djvu/249

 regiment of Engineers, three regiments of Field Artillery, one regiment of Horse Artillery, four regiments of Garrison Artillery, etc.; numbering in all about 30,000 men. Besides these regular troops there exists the Schutterij, a kind of Landwehr. As to the Indian Army, which consists of 36,000 men, 13,000 of whom are Europeans, it is composed of volunteers enlisted specially for service in foreign parts. From time to time one hears of the “endless war in Acheen,” but of late years this disturbed part of the Dutch possessions has been comparatively quiet; a humanitarian sentiment prevails, which has prevented the Acheenese being put down with a hard hand.

The Navy consists of just over a hundred vessels, and is manned by about 8,000 sailors. The names of most of the Dutch warships serve to recall the Navy's glorious deeds in the past.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Page:Jews and Judaism (Morris Jastrow).djvu/14

 more, as hitherto understood, and that is that the Jews are a chosen people. Let us again interpret it in its widest sense. To draw the conclusion that, because we consider ourselves an elect people, we therefore deem ourselves better than others, or are even obliged to hold ourselves aloof from others, is not warranted. That is a too narrow interpretation of the term. But to say, on the other hand, that every people has its mission—the Greeks to develop the idea of beauty, the Romans, that of law, and the like, and that the Jews, also, have theirs, not only leaves the term "vague and indeterminate," but is too wide. It makes mission equal to purpose. To say that the Jews serve their purpose, is simply equivalent to saying that everything serves some purpose. It needs only a glance at history to see the purpose, and a very important one they have served, but I do not think that that was all that was meant when we have hitherto spoken of Israel's mission. This, too, is a doctrine on which we must be clear. If we understand something else by the term mission, let us say so, but let us recognize that it is something essentially different from what has hitherto been understood by the term. There is another doctrine which might be mentioned, but about which there is a legitimate doubt whether it is essential to traditional Judaism—I mean that referring to a restoration of the Jews to Palestine. It is rather strange that this belief, which has grown so very weak in our days, should be held by our friends of other denominations to be one of the most characteristic traits of the Jews. Only the other day an eminent statesman of this country, and a true friend of the Jews, in an address, spoke of this matter as though his audience—composed of modern American Jews—were earnestly hoping and sighing for a return. I need not touch upon this, because as stated it is doubtful whether it is essential even to Judaism as hitherto understood. Let me only protest against the charge so frequently heard that Jews who believe in a return to Palestine cannot be good citizens of this or any other country. Not only do examples such as the late Sir Moses Montefiore prove the contrary, but there is no more reason why such a Jew, who clings with heart and


text:
Page:Jews and Judaism (Morris Jastrow).djvu/15

 soul to this belief, should not be loyal to the land in which he dwells, any more than to use the illustration employed by an eminent English statesman, when the civil disabilities of the Jews were discussed, one who believes the world will come to an end at a certain period, should for that reason be supposed to take no interest in his surroundings and no part in the work of the present. On the contrary, the Jew who conscientiously believes in a restoration, also believes that the better he fulfils his duties in the present the more effectively he will hasten the realization of his hopes which he puts in the distant future.

Whether I have exhausted the essential doctrines of Judaism as a special religion in mentioning Revelation, the Divine authority of the Bible, and the Divine mission of Israel, or not, it will not be denied that these doctrines have been included under the term Judaism as hitherto understood, and in the sense which I have attached to them. Here,we have something definite. What has been given may not be all of Judaism, but it is an essential part of it—a definite part of it. It is something by which we can measure the extent to which our views accord or do not accord with what has hitherto been understood under Judaism. Now, the question is, have the differences which exist among modern Jews, let us say especially of this country, though the same holds good of others, as Germany, France, England, and the like, where the same inﬂuences have been at work, have they reference only to different interpretations of the doctrines which have been enunciated, or do they go beyond this? To put the question still plainer, are we divided simply upon a wider or narrower interpretation of the doctrines of Revelation, Divine Authority of the Bible, Divine Mission of the Jews, or have we religious convictions on these points, which in essential particulars, diverge from those hitherto held by those professing Judaism as hitherto understood. This, it seems to me, is the real issue. This is the question which individuals and congregations must settle before any headway can be made. It appears to me that the interpretionsinterpretations [sic] which have been put upon the three doctrines under discussion by some of those representing radical


text:
Page:Jews and Judaism (Morris Jastrow).djvu/16

 views, all come under the category too wide—so wide as to be vague and indeterminate, so wide as to practically interpret them away. It is certainly high time if this be the case that it should be distinctly said. It is all very well to boast of our liberal views, but unless there is a bottom to them, they avail nothing. You, cannot build up a religion on mere phrases, and if you use terms in a loose or confused way, you are indulging in empty words. The great weakness of the Reform movement lies in its negative character, and it will not become positive until it adopts some positive basis. Mere opposition to orthodoxy is not a sufficient mainstay nor a sufficient reason for its existence. Things are in a sad state, you say. Believe me, friends, they will grow worse, as long as we do not find out exactly where we stand. Let us come to a definite understanding of what has hitherto been understood as Judaism, and let us also find out definitely, at least as definitely as we can, what we believe. Then having done this, we can draw a comparison between the two—between Jews and Judaism.

I have said that congregations must settle this question, namely, whether they adhere to the doctrines of Judaism as hitherto understood, or whether they hold religious convictions which diverge from them. There are two questions which may be asked: first, of what great importance is it, whether this question be settled or not? The chief object of Judaism, which is to direct us how to lead good honorable lives, is not affected thereby. You can be a good man—which is equivalent to being a good Jew,—it may be said, no matter what opinions you hold on the question of Revelation, Divine Authority of the Bible and the Divine Mission of the Jews. Certainly, I say, the chief aim of Judaism is and has always been to be a guide for our conduct in life. But it is just because of this, that the question is of the very highest importance. It is just because Judaism cannot inﬂuence our lives, as long as these essential points are not made clear, that we must insist, no matter at what sacrifice, upon reaching a clear understanding of them. The first thing, the thing more than any other demanded of a religious guide is that it be followed and consistently followed.


text:
Page:Jews and Judaism (Morris Jastrow).djvu/17

 Now, the most ﬂagrant and the most unfortunate feature of Judaism to-day is the awful break between theory and practice. Theoretically, congregations stand upon the traditional basis of Judaism, and practically they have broken loose from it. Theoretically, the Divine Authority of the Bible. or at any rate the authority of the Bible is assumed, and practically we care little or nothing about. Theoretically, the Sabbath is maintained, and practically it is not. Theoretically, doctrines are held, but the practical consequences that necessarily and consistently flow from them are not drawn. How can a religion possibly inﬂuence us, if such a rupture exists between theory and practice, and this rupture is naught but the consequence of the lack of clearness on the part of congregations and individuals where they really stand.

If you set up certain premises, you must draw the conclusions from them. The premises without the conclusions are useless. Imagine yourself in the place of a teacher, who is to lead such a congregation that sets up premises, but does not draw the conclusions. Suppose him to be an honest and sincere man. If he accepts the responsible position of leading a congregation, it is assumed that the stand of the congregation is also his platform. I will not speak of the fact that he has only an opportunity of meeting his congregation two or three times a year, and can, therefore. exert but little inﬂuence upon their conduct and upon their souls. But how can he impart profitable religious instruction at all if he is not allowed to draw the practical consequences of the views which he is expected to hold, and which his congregation formally represents? What must his position be in regard to such a question as the Sabbath? Should he teach the children the laws of the Sabbath, and then let them ask their parents why they do not observe them? or should he say that business considerations make it impossible? To what an awful pass must a religion have come that is forced to make such a sacrifice of consistency. You cannot make a compromise with your religious convictions. Either the Sabbath is to be observed, or it is not. If you believe it to be a law required by an authority which you acknowledge as binding, then you must


text:
Page:Jews and Judaism (Morris Jastrow).djvu/18

 fulfil it at any rate as best you can. If you do not acknowledge this authority, then say so. But if there is one thing which any religion (and Judaism perhaps more than any other, because it is to such a great degree practical) cannot tolerate, it is ambiguity. Inconsistency must be attended with dire results. If a minister wishes to be sincere, and is in earnest, he can neither avoid nor evade these questions. He must be able to teach with a pure and easy conscience, and he cannot do that if either he or his congregation must make a sacrifice of consistency or truth. You must have some basis for a religion. I care not what it is, but there must be, something on, which you can rear a structure. For this reason, your theory and practice must harmonize, a break between the two must prove fatal to a religion.

Let me come to the second question. Have congregations, it will be asked, the right to declare where they stand? Are not Jewish Congregations bound to a certain position? Are they not formed to maintain Judaism as hitherto understood and nothing else? The answer to this is, that, whether we like it or not, it is a fact that Jewish Congregations, as well as those of other denominations who have no authoritative body, are perfectly independent. Even if we had an authoritative body, that would not prevent the formation of independent bodies, as we see daily by the number of independent churches springing up. I say it is a fact, whether we like it or not. But I see no reason why we should not like it. If we believe in the development of religious thought, we must allow it a means of developing, and that can only be done by granting the utmost liberty to the individual and to the community. True, this may result in divisions and even ruptures, but this is far better than a forced unnatural union. Congregations then being formed by individuals of their own accord, they have a right to unite on whatever grounds they choose. If Jewish congregations adopt traditional Judaism—Judaism as the term has hitherto been understood—well and good. If not, they have still a perfect right to unite, but they must state precisely upon what basis they unite. They will then recognize how far


text: Page:Things Seen In Holland (1912).djvu/251


text:
Page:Jews and Judaism (Morris Jastrow).djvu/19

 their religious convictions do or do not accord with Judaism as hitherto understood. To call themselves Reform or Radical Reform, however, is saying nothing whatever because no one knows exactly what is understood by those terms and everyone understands something different. Let them state what they believe and act in accordance with what follows from the premises they set up. But you will say, is not the minister there for that purpose? Is he not there to lead the congregation? Yes; but the congregation must know whither they want, and whither they are going to be led. They are not a set of innocent lambs, to follow blindly their shepherd. No! I say a minister has no right to lead a congregation away from the road which they wish to take, or think they are taking. A minister who does this, is there under false pretences, just as on the other hand, a minister fails in his duty if he yields to any pressure which involves a departing from the principles he holds, and the congregation pretends to hold, and—I lay stress upon this—the consequences that follow from these principles. A minister is not and ought not be employed to change the basis on which a congregation stands, or is supposed to stand, or believes to stand, or pretends to stand. He certainly has no right to attempt this, whether in one direction or the other, without stating clearly, and so plainly that there can be no doubt about it, what his intentions are. A minister and his congregation must know and understand each other thoroughly; otherwise he cannot inﬂuence them nor they be benefited by him. It will not do for them to have different standpoints and if they have the same standpoints, they must also agree as to the conclusions to be drawn from them, and what is more, they must both draw them. A minister's example is as important as his words. In fact, you have always a right to judge a man by his acts rather than by what he says. For this reason, the most absolute sincerity and consistency is essential, if a minister is to inﬂuence those coming under his charge. He must not be expected to do anything merely for the sake of appearances, and, if expected, must refuse.

The duty therefore devolves upon both leaders and congregations


text:
Author:Cecil Goodrich Julius Dolmage

Works

 * Astronomy of To-Day (1909)

title: Author:Cecil Goodrich Julius Dolmage


text: Author talk:Cecil Goodrich Julius Dolmage


text:
Page:Jews and Judaism (Morris Jastrow).djvu/20

 to find out where they stand. If there are any differences dividing us, they ought to have reference to different religious convictions. On the ground of conviction, and not of policy, a stand and a firm one must be taken. It is no disgrace nor even a misfortune if we hold convictions which differ from those hitherto held by those professing Judaism, once more adding, as hitherto understood; but it is a positive disgrace and worse than a misfortune, if we do not know wherein we differ, or, knowing, do not say so. Differences in religious convictions, if only the convictions be honestly and clearly held, in no way lead to hostility, enmity or quarrels. It is only when there is confusion and inconsistency that we will have controversy instead of discussion, quarrels instead of arguments, mutual hostility instead of mutual respect. If you find two persons assailing each other, calling each other names, descending to personal attacks, you may depend upon it, either both are wrong, or neither is clear. You can always distinguish one who has clear and honest convictions from one who has not. The former will always entertain the highest respect for and speak in terms of the highest reverence of the convictions of others; the latter has only a haughty sneer, or an insulting word for his opponent. These quarrels and controversies, of which we have grown weary, will not, cannot cease until a stop is put, by congregations declaring where they stand, to the confusion at present prevailing. "Peace, peace," cries the old Jewish prophet, "but there is no peace." There will be none until the rupture between theory and practice, which is growing worse day by day, will be healed, not through a compromise, but through a consistent following of the convictions we hold, whatever they be. You ask how? I repeat by finding out what we believe, and acting in accordance with our beliefs.

In no other way, as far as I can see, can it be done. Our point of view, must be convictions and not policy. Our motto, consistency, and not accommodation. I revere Judaism, sincerely revere it. I love its past and admire it for what it has accomplished. But there is something still higher to me than Judaism, and that is conscience. Your first and most sacred duty is towards your conscience. There


text:
Page:Jews and Judaism (Morris Jastrow).djvu/21

 should be no higher master for you than it. If your convictions, your honest and clear convictions. reached after the best thought you are capable of, lead you in a direction diverging from the path of what has hitherto been understood under Judaism, you are bound—bound I say by the laws of traditional Judaism—to follow what you hold to be right. I believe that it is no paradox to say that such a man is a better Jew than one who countenances a clash between theory and practice, who sacrifices on the altar of accommodation or policy what he holds to be true, even if externally he clings to practices which have hitherto been identified with Judaism.

It is not essential whether what you hold to be the truth is really correct or not. But it is essential that you follow what you hold to be true. You must do it, if you wish to be honest. We must not only love truth, but have the most absolute confidence in it. Whither it points, we must go. Where it leads, we can safely follow. I say, therefore, if congregations no longer accept the essential doctrines of Judaism in the sense in which they have hitherto been understood. it is neither a crime nor a misfortune, but let them say so, and if this be the case, do that which follows logically from the position they have taken. Let them not, however, halt between two opinions or sail under false colors.

From the point of view of conviction and not of policy or accomodationaccommodation [sic], all those questions which now agitate American Jews must be judged. In discussing, for example, such a question as that concerning a day of rest, let us not ask, can it be kept, but must it be kept on the seventh day? If you acknowledge the authority of the Bible in the sense in which the term authority has hitherto been understood, there is no question whatever but it must be kept, and you must do it, at least as well as you possibly can. If you do not believe in this authority, by your honest convictions do not hold the Bible of divine origin and authority, as the terms have hitherto been understood, then you must say so, and—I lay stress upon this—act accordingly. It is not a question of transferring Saturday to Sunday, it is a question of convictions. The


text:
Page:Jews and Judaism (Morris Jastrow).djvu/22

 same applies to other questions, for instance that of prayer. It is wrong and if not wrong, certainly of no positive value or good to abolish a prayer because it is too long or too short, or for a similar reason. Define first, exactly what you mean by prayer, what kind of prayers you believe in, and then act. Have only such prayers as accord with your convictions. We must neither abolish for the pleasure of abolishing nor introduce an innovation because it is new. But we must abolish what contradicts our beliefs, because it would be an inconsistency to maintain it. We have no choice but to make an innovation if in turn our convictions call for it. And so with the other questions. It is equally wrong, it appears to me, to make the preservation of Judaism the only criterion by which to measure our acts. Sincerely as we may feel attached to Judaism, that would again be committing the mistake of exchanging convictions for policy. Deeply as I myself revere Judaism, I say the first standard is our own religious convictions. We must follow them first. If Judaism will be preserved thereby, well and good. If not, I still say we must be honest. There may be many who argue thus: if this or that be done or not done, Judaism will perish. Are we not, when we speak thus, entirely too much concerned about Judaism, too little about ourselves? The life and death of Judaism, it has well been said, and I share the sentiment, does not depend upon our adherence to it. There are far more powerful inﬂuences at work, going to undermine or strengthen a religion. Judaism, I add, will survive if it deserves to survive, and in my mind there is no doubt but that the best of Judaism is immortal. But we need have no hesitation in saying that if Judaism can only survive at a sacrifice of conscience, of what we hold to be right and true, then it will perish and must perish, no matter whether we adhere to it or not. Unless we are to have faith in the dictates of our conscience, I know not in what we should trust. Again we hear, if this or that be done, Jews will lose their identity, I for my part do not believe they will. I believe that in a hundred years from now, we will be Jews as we are Jews to-day. whether we like it or not, if for no other reason simply because others will


text:
Page:Jews and Judaism (Morris Jastrow).djvu/23

 consider us Jews. But I say that even if this fear be justified, we are still commanded to be honest, to cling to what we hold to be true, and follow unﬂinchingly what we deem the right. Nothing that we may do in obedience to the dictates of conscience can make us revere and appreciate our past less, even if we do not accept it in its entirety. Nothing that we may do in following the trumpet call of our honest convictions can ever lead us to take any but the very deepest interest in the welfare of those who will still, under all circumstances, be our brethren, or will prevent us from laboring for their welfare to the very best of our abilities. Everything that we will do in following where we see the torch of right lighting up the path, must lead us to love and respect those who differ from us—not to quarrel with them; on the contrary, in proportion as we are sincere, honest and pure, we will be full of love and sympathy for the narrower and wider circle of our fellow-men. We will love them, not with the haughty condescension of a superior towards an inferior, but with the love for one whom we are eager to clasp by the hand and call—brother. Then, when we believe what we practice and practice what we believe, the inﬂuence of religion will "like soft music steal upon our soul," will infiltrate itself throughout our entire being, and be with us a cloud to shield us by day from the piercing rays of the sun and a pillar of fire to guide us through the darkness of the night.

Time bids me hasten to the close. From what has been said—imperfect though it be—it will be clear to you that in my opinion the question before us is one concerning Jews rather than Judaism, if, as I believe to be necessary in order to obtain a clear view of the situation, a distinction is to be made between the two. It is a question more especially of the young generation of American Jews, which is no longer rising, but before us. It is a question whether they will gain and maintain the respect and esteem of their fellow-men, whether they will lead pure and honorable lives, whether they will become useful members of society, with noble and lofty aspirations. There are, notably in the large cities, but also in the small ones, thousands upon thousands of Jews who come


text:
Page:Jews and Judaism (Morris Jastrow).djvu/24

 under no religious inﬂuence whatever, for it is a fact to which it is useless to close our eyes, that the pulpit exercises but little influence to-day and scarcely any on the younger generation. This is a most serious matter, one to which no one, if he but reﬂect seriously, can be different. Jews have been noted heretofore for the many virtues and good qualities they possess. The purity of the family life and the sacredness of the marriage tie among them have been commented upon already by very ancient authors. We are to-day held up as a pattern to others in this respect. Their liberality and generosity are well-known to all. But virtues and good traits, it must be remembered, are not a spontaneous growth. They must be cultivated, and if they exist, they must be nurtured, or they are bound to perish.

It is for this reason—though not for this alone—that man needs religion. I care not what religion it is, but all of us need a religion. Men need a guide for their lives, need a means of developing their moral sense. Man needs a power that can give wings to his soul in its aspirations towards a higher sphere, that can elevate him to a higher conception of life and life's duties, and enable him to maintain it in sunshine and rain, in days of joy and nights of sorrow. We need religion because it corresponds to some innate craving, as is sufficiently proved by its universal existence under some form or other. To say that progress and civilization enable us to dispense with religion is absurd. Men need religion to-day as much as ever, nay, more than ever, for the changed conditions of life demand stronger moral forces to steer clear of dangers and strike the right course. Men need religion to inﬂuence their lives, but in order that this may be the case, their religion and life must beat in harmony. Theory and practice, belief and act, creed and deed must not clash with one another, but supplement each other. Let our deeds, including our religious practices, which are a part of our deeds, be in accordance with our creed, and let us honestly draw the consequences of our beliefs, whatever they be. If they lead us to an adherence to the doctrines of Judaism in the sense hitherto attached to them, let us act in accordance with them, clinging firmly and consistently to what we


text:
Page:Jews and Judaism (Morris Jastrow).djvu/25

 hold to be true and right; if they lead us to what is or appears to be a deviation from the traditional road, let us no less have the courage to follow our convictions, ready to uphold them with that same unfailing devotion with which our ancestors clung to theirs. We can do this with the assurance that we are doing our most sacred duty. No matter where we stand, we still need and can still have religion. But whatever we do, let us be consistent, let us be true to our beliefs by acting them out. Let us by all means in our power endeavor to find out what our convictions are, if we do not clearly know them, and then let us act in accordance with them. This is simple, and this alone is honest.

Unless we do this we have no religion, for a religion that exerts no inﬂuence upon us—and it can exert none, if theory and practice clash—is not worthy of the name. Religion is a sacred thing. Religious convictions and religious practices are not to be trifled with, or religion becomes a tool and a farce.

Our ancestors lived harmonious lives, were true to the convictions to which they clung while the winds of persecution and hatred, fanning the ﬂames of fanaticism and intolerance, blew around them. We live in more auspicious times. We breathe the balmy air of freedom, and look aloft at the blue skies of independence. But we must maintain the honest spirit of our ancestors. We are acting in accordance with that spirit, if we follow as firmly our beliefs, whatever they be, as they did theirs.

I have thus endeavored to place before you the view of the situation to which the best thought and observation of which I am capable has led me. I have tried to do this clearly and impartially. If I have failed, my intentions are not at fault. I am not here this morning to advocate my own religious views. I have not even thought it proper to lay them before you, not because I have any hesitation in declaring them, but because this is not the occasion for it. Should an opportunity to do this present itself, or be granted, I will not be found wanting. If not, I will still endeavor to do in whatever capacity or calling, that which devolves upon all of us, whether in or out of the pulpit, to seek our happiness in living, not for ourselves alone, but also for others.


text: Page:Jews and Judaism (Morris Jastrow).djvu/26


text: Page:Jews and Judaism (Morris Jastrow).djvu/27


text: Page:Jews and Judaism (Morris Jastrow).djvu/28


text: Jews and Judaism

title: Jews and Judaism


text: Page:Jews and Judaism (Morris Jastrow).djvu/1


text:
Page:Evolution of the thermometer.djvu/9

 "the thermometer was invented by Drebbel." And yet it is easy to show that the Hollander had no part in the invention and never claimed it, and that the error originated in the misinterpretation of a simple experiment described by Drebbel in a treatise on the "Elements."

Cornelius Drebbel, born in Alkmaar, Holland, 1572, was as alchemist who claimed to have discovered perpetual motion, and acquired sufficient reputation for learning to be invited to the court of James II, King of England; to him he dedicated his treatise on Primum mobile in 1607. Later in life he visited Prague where Rudolph had gathered famous alchemists, astrologers, and magicians, as well as more reputable astronomers, artists, antiquarians, and skilled mechanics; Drebbel, however, was unsuccessful in sustaining his claim to the discovery of perpetual motion, and Emperor Rudolph threw him into prison, from which he was released 'ere long by the death of the monarch, in 1612.

I have in my private library two copies of Drebbel's rare little volume, one in Dutch bearing the title: "Van de elementen quinta essentia en primum mobile, Amsterdam, 1709," and with a second title-page having the words:


text:
Page:Evolution of the thermometer.djvu/88

Rh that invented by the Frenchman Réaumer finds no credit in France, but is popular in Germany; and that of Celsius, the Swede, modified by Christin, of Lyons, is used chiefly in France, Belgium, and Switzerland.

Secondly, no one of the thermometers now in use has exactly the scale originally devised by the person whose name is attached to it, later and more perfect methods of manufacture having modified the primary form.

The following table of thirty-five thermometer scales has been compiled from many sources, including the tables of Dr. Martine and of Van Swinden.


text:
Page:Evolution of the thermometer.djvu/10

 "Grondige oplossinge van de natuur en eyggenschappen der elementen, Amsterdam, 1732." The other copy is in German and bears the date 1715. (Poggendorff, the German historian of physics, admits never having seen an edition of this treatise by Drebbel.)

The Dutch version contains a full-page woodcut representing a retort hanging by a chain from a hook in a beam, the mouth of the retort is under water in a basin, and beneath it is a fire; on the surface of the water are seen bubbles of air issuing from the retort; the whole is observed by two men in out-door costume. The text accompanying this picture, when translated, reads as follows: "Heat makes air and water subtle and light; cold, as the opposite of heat, makes them smaller and presses them together and condenses all the air that the heat had made to rise, as may be clearly shown when a glass retort is hung with the mouth in a bucket of water and fire is placed under the belly. We shall then see that as soon as the air in the glass begins to get hot, that air rises out of the mouth of the retort, and the water gets full of bubbles, and this continues so long as the air gets hotter; but if the fire be removed from beneath the retort


text:
User talk:MJ Emigh

Hello, and welcome to Wikisource. We appreciate your contribution, but it unfortunately does not seem to be appropriate for Wikisource. Wikisource is a collection of previously published texts. If the page you contributed does not meet these requirements, it will be deleted shortly. Thank you. --Eliyak T · C 09:08, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

title: User talk:MJ Emigh


text:
Page:Sons and Lovers, 1913, Lawrence.djvu/136

124 “And so’s the pit,” he said. “Look how it heaps together, like something alive almost—a big creature that you don’t know.”

“Yes,” she said. “Perhaps!”

“And all the trucks standing waiting, like a string of beasts to be fed,” he said.

“And very thankful I am they are standing,” she said, “for that means they’ll turn middling time this week.”

“But I like the feel of men on things, while they’re alive. There’s a feel of men about trucks, because they’ve been handled with men’s hands, all of them.”

“Yes,” said Mrs. Morel.

They went along under the trees of the highroad. He was constantly informing her, but she was interested. They passed the end of Nethermere, that was tossing its sunshine like petals lightly in its lap. Then they turned on a private road, and in some trepidation approached a big farm. A dog barked furiously. A woman came out to see.

“Is this the way to Willey Farm?” Mrs. Morel asked. Paul hung behind in terror of being sent back. But the woman was amiable, and directed them. The mother and son went through the wheat and oats, over a little bridge into a wild meadow. Peewits, with their white breasts glistening, wheeled and screamed about them. The lake was still and blue. High overhead a heron floated. Opposite, the wood heaped on the hill, green and still.

“It’s a wild road, mother,” said Paul. “Just like Canada.”

“Isn’t it beautiful!” said Mrs. Morel, looking round.

“See that heron—see—see her legs?”

He directed his mother, what she must see and what not. And she was quite content.

“But now,” she said, “which way? He told me through the wood.”

The wood, fenced and dark, lay on their left.

“I can feel a bit of a path this road,” said Paul. “You’ve got town feet, somehow or other, you have.”

They found a little gate, and soon were in a broad green alley of the wood, with a new thicket of fir and pine on one hand, an old oak glade dipping down on the other. And among the oaks the bluebells stood in pools of azure, under the new green hazels, upon a pale fawn floor of oak-leaves. He found flowers for her.

“Here’s a bit of new-mown hay,” he said; then, again, he


text:
Page:Sons and Lovers, 1913, Lawrence.djvu/137

Rh brought her forget-me-nots. And, again, his heart hurt with love, seeing her hand, used with work, holding the little bunch of flowers he gave her. She was perfectly happy.

But at the end of the riding was a fence to climb. Paul was over in a second.

“Come,” he said, “let me help you.”

“No, go away. I will do it in my own way.”

He stood below with his hands up ready to help her. She climbed cautiously.

“What a way to climb!” he exclaimed scornfully, when she was safely to earth again.

“Hateful stiles!” she cried.

“Duffer of a little woman,” he replied, “who can’t get over ’em.”

In front, along the edge of the wood, was a cluster of low red farm buildings. The two hastened forward. Flush with the wood was the apple orchard, where blossom was falling on the grindstone. The pond was deep under a hedge and overhanging oak-trees. Some cows stood in the shade. The farm and buildings, three sides of a quadrangle, embraced the sunshine towards the wood. It was very still.

Mother and son went into the small railed garden, where was a scent of red gillivers. By the open door were some floury loaves, put out to cool. A hen was just coming to peck them. Then, in the doorway suddenly appeared a girl in a dirty apron. She was about fourteen years old, had a rosy dark face, a bunch of short black curls, very fine and free, and dark eyes; shy, questioning, a little resentful of the strangers, she disappeared. In a minute another figure appeared, a small, frail woman, rosy, with great dark brown eyes.

“Oh!” she exclaimed, smiling with a little glow, “you’ve come, then. I am glad to see you.” Her voice was intimate and rather sad.

The two women shook hands.

“Now are you sure we’re not a bother to you?” said Mrs. Morel. “I know what a farming life is.”

“Oh no! We’re only too thankful to see a new face, it’s so lost up here.”

“I suppose so,” said Mrs. Morel.

They were taken through into the parlour—a long, low room, with a great bunch of guelder-roses in the fireplace. There the women talked, whilst Paul went out to survey the land. He was in the garden smelling the gillivers and looking


text:
Page:Sons and Lovers, 1913, Lawrence.djvu/138

126 at the plants, when the girl came out quickly to the heap of coal which stood by the fence.

“I suppose these are cabbage-roses?” he said to her, pointing to the bushes along the fence.

She looked at him with startled, big brown eyes.

“I suppose they are cabbage-roses when they come out?” he said.

“I don’t know,” she faltered. “They’re white with pink middles.”

“Then they’re maiden-blush.”

Miriam flushed. She had a beautiful warm colouring.

“I don’t know,” she said.

“You don’t have much in your garden,” he said.

“This is our first year here,” she answered, in a distant, rather superior way, drawing back and going indoors. He did not notice, but went his round of exploration. Presently his mother came out, and they went through the buildings. Paul was hugely delighted.

“And I suppose you have the fowls and calves and pigs to look after?” said Mrs. Morel to Mrs. Leivers.

“No,” replied the little woman. “I can’t find time to look after cattle, and I’m not used to it. It’s as much as I can do to keep going in the house.”

“Well, I suppose it is,” said Mrs. Morel.

Presently the girl came out.

“Tea is ready, mother,” she said in a musical, quiet voice.

“Oh, thank you, Miriam, then we’ll come,” replied her mother, almost ingratiatingly. “Would you care to have tea now, Mrs. Morel?”

“Of course,” said Mrs. Morel. “Whenever it’s ready.”

Paul and his mother and Mrs. Leivers had tea together. Then they went out into the wood that was flooded with bluebells, while fumy forget-me-nots were in the paths. The mother and son were in ecstasy together.

When they got back to the house, Mr. Leivers and Edgar, the eldest son, were in the kitchen. Edgar was about eighteen. Then Geoffrey and Maurice, big lads of twelve and thirteen, were in from school. Mr. Leivers was a good-looking man in the prime of life, with a golden-brown moustache, and blue eyes screwed up against the weather.

The boys were condescending, but Paul scarcely observed it. They went round for eggs, scrambling into all sorts of places. As they were feeding the fowls Miriam came out. The boys took no notice of her. One hen, with her yellow


text:
Page:Sons and Lovers, 1913, Lawrence.djvu/139

Rh chickens, was in a coop. Maurice took his hand full of corn and let the hen peck from it.

“Durst you do it?” he asked of Paul.

“Let’s see,” said Paul.

He had a small hand, warm, and rather capable-looking. Miriam watched. He held the corn to the hen. The bird eyed it with her hard, bright eye, and suddenly made a peck into his hand. He started, and laughed. “Rap, rap, rap!” went the bird’s beak in his palm. He laughed again, and the other boys joined.

“She knocks you, and nips you, but she never hurts,” said Paul, when the last corn had gone.

“Now, Miriam,” said Maurice, “you come an’ ’ave a go”

“No,” she cried, shrinking back.

“Ha! baby. The mardy-kid!” said her brothers.

“It doesn’t hurt a bit,” said Paul. “It only just nips rather nicely.”

“No,” she still cried, shaking her black curls and shrinking.

“She dursn’t,” said Geoffrey. “She niver durst do anything except recite poitry.”

“Dursn’t jump off a gate, dursn’t tweedle, dursn’t go on a slide, dursn’t stop a girl hittin’ her. She can do nowt but go about thinkin’ herself somebody. ‘The Lady of the Lake.’ Yah!” cried Maurice.

Miriam was crimson with shame and misery.

“I dare do more than you,” she cried. “You’re never anything but cowards and bullies.”

“Oh, cowards and bullies!” they repeated, mincingly mocking her speech.

he quoted against her, shouting with laughter.

She went indoors. Paul went with the boys into the orchard, where they had rigged up a parallel bar. They did feats of strength. He was more agile than strong, but it served. He fingered a piece of apple-blossom that hung low on a swinging bough.

“I wouldn’t get the apple-blossom,” said Edgar, the eldest brother. “There’ll be no apples next year.”

“I wasn’t going to get it,” replied Paul, going away.

The boys felt hostile to him; they were more interested in


text:
Page:Artabanzanus (Ferrar, 1896).djvu/232

224 Old Scratch (tremendous uproar, loud cries of "Knock him on the head!" "Hang him up by the heels!" "Burn him alive!" etc. Sir, if perfect—hem—freedom of speech, and innocuous ventilation of innocent and highly-inflammatory opinion is not permitted in this Hon. House, I will forthwith amputate my walking-stick out of it, as quickly as I can (cheers, and "The sooner the better"). I will not condescend ("Oh, oh!") to give any reason for my much-to-be-pitied opinion. That other great question—the Federation of the whole world—I feel that I can safely leave it with great confidence in their multifarious hands (cheers and hisses). I am sorry, sir, to provoke anything like a spirit—hem—of hostility or impracticability ("Hear, hear"). The day will come when one Federal Government will rule the world—("Yes, our Government"). But how, let me ask, could that Honourable—hem—and most respectable House expect to rule the world when it was in the dark with respect to that mysterious power, which can make the wheels of coaches go round? Why it can move tremendous floating palaces, carrying hundreds of men and women over the oceans of the earth, against wind and tide, about twenty miles an hour. ("Oh, oh," and derisive laughter.) His Majesty the Emperor was pleased to refer in his gracious— hem—speech to his matured plan of building a new city round the Great Lake of Tasmania ("Hear, hear "). I am bold enough to say that it has my cordial and patriotic approval—no, I mean my perpetual disapproval (groans and hisses). Yes, sir, and this is my reason for entertaining this perhaps highly reprehensible opinion: the inhabitants of this city of Pandapolis could not live even at the Great Lake in perfect peace; there would be perpetual war: the Salvation Army would be constantly attacking them, and precious blood would flow on both sides. In addition to this' [I now roared, my


text:
Page:Evolution of the thermometer.djvu/42

 late as the middle of the eighteenth century had three scales, Réaumur, Fahrenheit, and Florentine; one of these is in the possession of the Naturforschende Gesellschaft of Danzig. Réaumur, writing in 1730, speaks of Florentine thermometers as in common use.

Through whom knowledge of the thermometers devised by the Florentine Academy reached England is not known, but it has been suggested that the French traveler Monconys conveyed it to the Hon. Robert Boyle on the occasion of his visit to London in 1663, and there is circumstantial evidence in favor of this view. Monconys was most politely received by the scholarly Irishman and attended a meeting of the Royal Society on the 30th of May; he had with him in London one of the new instruments and made an entry in his diary on the 31st May to this effect: "The weather was cold towards evening and the thermometer fell to 6.5 degrees."

While the Accademia del Cimento was busy experimenting on heat and cold, magnetism and acoustics, and trying to prove the


text:
Page:Evolution of the thermometer.djvu/43

 of positive levity," the British philosopher was working in similar fields; he improved the air-pump (invented in 1650 by Otto de Guericke), devised a physico-mechanical experiments touching the spring of the air," discovered the fundamental truth known as "Boyle's Law," invented the manometer, and made a great variety of observations in chemistry and physics of prime importance. All this work qualified him for thermometrical studies, and it is said that he constructed a "sealed weather-glass" before he saw the Italian instrument, but this is improbable.

Boyle graduated the stems of thermometers with "little specks of amel" into inches and fractions as small as sixteenths; in one experiment he found that "sal-armoniac" dissolved in water "made it descend to 2-11/16 inches in a quarter of an hour. He observed that thermometer stems were not sufficiently even and cylindrical, being often widest near the bulb, and said this was a source of inaccuracy.

Boyle felt the need of a standard permitting comparison of effects shown by different thermometers, and expressed it thus: "We are greatly at a loss for a standard whereby to measure cold. The common instruments show


text:
Page:Artabanzanus (Ferrar, 1896).djvu/233

Rh blood being up] 'I must make the admission, which may be damaging to my reputation in this most respectable—hem—assembly, that I am, and always was from a baby (a stentorian voice, "The devil you were!") opposed to hypocrisy and devilment of all descriptions ("Oh, oh!"). I hate bunyips (uproar), I abominate demons (renewed uproar), I detest liars (hisses and cries of "Cut his tongue out!"). I move that the words be taken down ("Order, order"; "Kick the villain out!"). Sir, I protest against this horrible treatment of a guest and visitor from a superior world. (Great confusion, in which the Thunderer joined with his bell.) Hon. members had better go and play cards or billiards (cheers), or perhaps a game of football in the courtyard would refresh them. ("With you for our ball!" and loud cheers.) I defy you all; if your grand city shall ever be built round the Great Lake of my darling Tasmania, I hope to see the day when it will be buried ten miles deep in the Pacific Ocean!'

Here there burst forth a perfect hurricane of rage and abuse. A crowd of members jumped up on the table, with the furious intention of annihilating me on the spot, but a terrific scream from Bellagranda arrested them in their fell purpose. That unhappy princess fainted away after she had screamed, and was borne from the hall by her terrified pages; her lion, which had sat on his hams quietly all the day by her throne, following her, growling and wagging his tail viciously. Some of the Ministers had rushed upon the table with the crowd, and stood before me foaming. One of them shook his great fist close to my face, and shouted: 'You audacious insulting blackguard, you shall die! I'll cut your throat from ear to ear myself. I'll squelch you—to dare to say a word against Home Rule, what my posterity above ground are panting for! I'll grind you to powder, trample you in the dust, and drag your


text:
Page:Evolution of the thermometer.djvu/44

 us no more than the relative coldness of the air, but leave us in the dark as to the positive degree thereof; whence we cannot communicate the idea of any such degree to another person. For not only the several differences of this quality have no names assigned them, but our sense of feeling cannot therein be depended upon; and thermometers are such very variable things that it seems morally impossible from them to settle such a measure of coldness as we have of time, distance, weight, etc." (1665).

Boyle endeavored to overcome this difficulty; believing that the melting-point of ice varied with geographical latitude, he proposed using the oil of aniseed for getting a fixed point, placing it around the bulb of an alcohol thermometer, allowing the oil to freeze and marking the height of the spirit of wine in the bulb "when the oil begins to curdle."

This scheme for getting a fixed point has been wholly misunderstood by some historians who state that Boyle filled his thermometers with aniseed oil!

While Boyle tried to secure one fixed point he overlooked the advantages of having two; he strove to compute the absolute expansion


text:
Page:Artabanzanus (Ferrar, 1896).djvu/234

226 carcase at the tail of my old coat through the holy mud of Ireland! I challenge you to fight me if you have the liver of a jackass—yaw, yaw!"

'Stand back, Partigan, I'm his friend!' roared the well-known voice of Doctor Julius. 'For shame, all against one; back, you sons of perdition, and leave him to me, He shall fight you, Sir Dashmy, never fear; or if he won't I will myself; we have been secret enemies long enough, let us be open ones now. Come, Ubertus, you have played the fool here to some purpose—'pon my soul, I begin to think you must be a brave fellow after all; but we are wasting time; who's your friend, Sir Dashmy Partigan?'

'The white-livered, hang-dog, cowardly rascal hasn't accepted my challenge!' roared the enraged Sir Dashmy.

'Say you'll fight him,' said the Doctor; 'never say die, or flinch now; I'll be your second. I'll see you through it. Who's your friend, Partigan?'

'My friend, sir,' replied the wrathful Secretary for Foreign Affairs, 'is the Hon. Kattyscalpa Bomblazo! but I've not heard your brave comrade accept my challenge yet. Hi fight you both. If you hide him down among the black rocks in the valley of the Dark River, by the eternal fumes of brimstone and phosphorus I'll find him out, and drag him from his hiding-place—yaw, yaw!'

'I'll speak for him,' bellowed the Doctor, now thoroughly enraged; 'you contemptible tiger-faced bully, he shall fight you!'

'I can speak for myself, Doctor,' I said at last; 'I will fight this gentleman, and think myself highly honoured by so doing.'

'Then we can go. Bomblazo, have your principal ready in the great quadrangle at the end of the third avenue at ten to-night.'


text:
Page:Artabanzanus (Ferrar, 1896).djvu/235

Rh Bomblazo waved his tail gracefully, and bowed stiffly.

I followed my friend out of the palace, and into his carriage.

'Now,' said he with a laugh, as we drove off, 'now we shall have some glorious fun! Crackers and bombshells. Ubertus, you are a trump, and no mistake.'


text:
Page:Evolution of the thermometer.djvu/45

 of alcohol and to divide the scale into ten thousandths, or some aliquot part of the total expansion.

Strange notions of natural phenomena were current in Boyle's day and the "Father of Chemistry " was not above crediting absurdities; he quoted Orthelius who wrote: "The liquor distilled from the ore of magnesia, or of bismuth, will swell considerably in the glass it is kept in at the full moon, and subside at the new."

Contemporary with Boyle, another distinguished British philosopher was occupied with improvements in thermometers. Robert Hooke, afterwards secretary of the Royal Society, published in 1664 his "Micrographia;" in this work he says: "I have brought sealed thermometers to a great certainty and tenderness, for I have made some with stems above four feet long in which the expanding liquor would so far vary as to be very neer the top in the heat of summer and preety neer the bottom at the coldest time of winter." Hooke filled his thermometers with "best rectified spirit of wine highly ting'd with the lovely colour of cochineal." To graduate the stem he placed zero at the point which the liquid stood when


text: Artabanzanus/Chapter 14

title: Artabanzanus/Chapter 14


text:
Page:Evolution of the thermometer.djvu/46

 the bulb was placed in freezing distilled water; he then marked the divisions above and below "according to the degrees of expansion or contraction of the liquor in proportion to the bulk it had when it indur'd the freezing cold."

Edmund Halley, writing in 1700, said that Hooke exhibited at Gresham College, 2nd January, 1667-8, a combination of barometer and thermometer in separate tubes, the freezing-point of water being equal to zero, and the stem being graduated from -70 to +130.

Hooke made an important step in advance when he took the freezing-point of water as a fixed point in the scale, but the statement made by Brewster that in 1684 Hooke proposed the boiling-point as a second fixed point has been examined by Poggendorff and not verified. The claim has been made that the two fiduciary points were first proposed by the Dutch mathematician Christian Huyghens, in a letter dated 2nd January, 1665, addressed to Robert Moray. (A. Momber, Schr. naturf. Gesch. Danzig, N. F. VII, 108.) Huyghens wrote: "It would be well to have a universal and determinate standard for heat and cold, securing a definite proportion between the capacity of the bulb and the tube, and then taking for the


text:
Page:Evolution of the thermometer.djvu/47

 the degree of cold at which water begins to freeze, or better the temperature of boiling water, so that without sending a thermometer to a distance, one could communicate the degrees of heat or of cold found in experiments and record them for the use of posterity." In this passage Huyghens does indeed suggest the two phenomena for fixing a standard, but only as alternatives, and he seems to have had no idea of dividing the space between them.

The proposition to divide into equal parts the interval between two points to be ascertained by experiment was made four years later by Honoré Fabri, a Jesuit of French birth, who had been one of the corresponding members of the Accademia del Cimento. In his voluminous work on physics published in 1669, he describes an experiment with a Florentine thermometer for the purpose of constructing such a scale; he applied snow in very cold weather to the bulb and marked the point at which the liquid stood, then he marked the position of the liquid at the highest heat of summer and divided the line drawn between these points into eight equal parts. As we now know, the higher fixed point was ill-chosen, but the method was correct in principle, though not adopted until


text:
Page:Evolution of the thermometer.djvu/48

 long after. Meteorological observations were made with Hooke's thermometers by John Wallis, professor of mathematics in Oxford University, and he recorded in a certain paper published in the Philosophical Transactions for 1669, (p. 113), that the "liquor" stood at three and one-half inches on December 26, 1669, and at seven inches in "brisk frosts."

Several novel forms of thermometers were constructed about 1660-62 by the accomplished experimenter in physics, Otto de Guericke, Burgomaster of Magdeburg; they all bore impress of his genius, and one of them was, and still remains, unique in many particulars. It was gigantic in size being above twenty feet long, gorgeous with blue paint and gilt stars, and decorated with the image of a winged angel whose outstretched arm pointed to the temperature at every moment. For convenience the immense air-thermoscope was fastened to the wall of a house on the shady side; it was renowned for its power of showing "the coldest and hottest weather throughout an entire year." The instrument consisted of a large copper globe joined to a long tube one inch wide, of the same metal; the tube was bent upon itself


text:
Page:Evolution of the thermometer.djvu/49

 {| style="float:left; " Guericke's thermomet'r. so as to form a very narrow U, in which was placed a certain amount of alcohol. The shorter arm of the U was open at the top; on the liquid within it floated a tiny inverted cup of brass foil to which a cord was attached that passed around a wheel, hung upon the underside of the globe, and carried at the other end a little figure of an angel pointing to the scale on the tube; the tube was concealed from the observer by a wooden case, and the image hung without. A valve at one side of the large copper sphere permitted enough air to be withdrawn by means of the air-pump, to adjust the height of the image, which hung about half way up the tube. On the fifteen-foot scale were the words: "Magum frigus, aer frigidus, aer subfrigidus, aer temperatus, aer subcalidus,
 * width=120px|Evolution of the Thermometer 1592-1743 pg 58.png
 * width=120px|Evolution of the Thermometer 1592-1743 pg 58.png
 * }


text:
Page:The Mothers of England.djvu/72

Rh would be the increase of their moral influence over their children, extending in all probability to the end of life.

I can not help again observing here, that there are few things in this world over which one feels more inclined to lament, than the total waste of good feeling—the utter failure of the best motives from the want of a little knowledge, or a little forethought, as to the surest means of carrying them into effect. That it is peculiarly the lot of woman to wear herself out in this fruitless expenditure, has been said and sung by many a feeling writer, and by none more sweetly than our own lamented poetess:—

But why is it so? For no other reason than because woman considers it more beautiful to feel than to think. And so perhaps it is. Yet that she should think sufficiently to make her feelings tell upon the welfare of the beings whose happiness she has so much at heart, is the very point which, in looking upon the world, we long to urge upon women in general, and especially upon mothers.

Among the elements of human character most justly valued in society, and especially in the home circle, are gratitude and generosity. It would seem that the former of these might naturally grow out of the situation of a young child dependant upon others for the supply of every want and the gratification of every wish. We see, however, that this is far from being the case; for those very children who are the most unsparingly indulged, are generally the most ungrateful. Indeed, how should they be otherwise? Indulgence does not make them happy; and we find, throughout the world, that gratitude is not proportioned to the bestowment of favors, but to the benefit we are sensible of deriving from them. It is well, however, to begin by instilling ideas of gratitude, if not actual sensations, whenever a child is the subject of kindness from a friend. Children should never be allowed to forget who gave them any of their toys, who took them to

title: Page:The Mothers of England.djvu/72


text:
Page:The Mothers of England.djvu/73

68 see any gratifying sight, or who procured them the means of extraordinary enjoyment in any other way. Above all, the mother ought not to be so fastidious, so guilty of false delicacy, as to leave herself out of the question in her efforts to inspire gratitude; for without any assumption of merit above mothers in generator in fact anything bordering upon self-praise, she may distinctly set before her children the innumerable benefits they derive from maternal care. She may point to the circumstances of orphans destitute of all such benefits; and she may even describe occasionally to the older ones, her own sufferings and privations in the discharge of her duly to the younger. This, however, should be done without fretfulness and without murmuring; for to complain to children that they are destructive of their mother's peace and comfort, is infinitely worse than to leave them in total ignorance that either the one or the other is capable of being disturbed.

It might seem, on a superficial view of the subject, that gratitude was but a little thing to instil into the minds of children, unqualified as they naturally are, to render it productive of practical results, so as in any measure to repay their benefactors; but here we err, as usual, by looking to immediate consequences, rather than to the future benefit of the rising generation. It is certainly a little thing for a child to bring the first rose it gathers to its mother, because it knows that she is doing something every day, and almost every hour, for its good; but it is not a little thing, that as children grow up to be men and women, they should treasure in their hearts the sweet remembrance of benefits received, that they should still yearn in after years to pay back again some portion of the debt; and above all, having early learned their own relative insignificance and helplessness, and their consequent dependance upon the kindness of parents and friends—it is not a little thing that they should throw all these feelings into a higher channel, and refer them to the Giver of every blessing—the Friend in every hour of need.

With regard to feelings of gratitude, perhaps more than any other which claim the general approbation of mankind, selfishness, pride, and worldly-mindedness too often stand in the way of our seeing their real value. The various

title: Page:The Mothers of England.djvu/73


text:
Page:The Mothers of England.djvu/74

Rh imperfections of those of our fellow-creatures from whom we receive benefits, seem also to afford us an excuse for the absence of gratitude toward them; we find too that their kind services are not always such as do us any real good; and thus we go on narrowing the circle of our pleasurable sensations, and hardening our hearts against those genial influences which would make us both happier and better than we are.

By excluding from our minds the feeling of gratitude to our fellow-creatures, it ceases to be habitual; and thus, when we strive to call it forth in our religious exercises, or when contemplating the good providence of God, it is scarcely probable that a sensation so strange to the accustomed tone of our minds should come at the moment it is wanted. It is true that expressions of gratitude abound in all our exercises of prayer and praise, in all our advice, in all our warnings, and in all the consolations we would offer to the suffering or destitute; but is the feeling there? Alas! how often has the Christian to lament that he can not throw the full force of his warmest emotions into the language he is uttering—that he can not, from the depths of his own heart, go alone with the inspired Psalmist in those outbursts of gratitude, m which the harmony of heaven seems blended with the poetry of earth!

Still there are seasons in the past experience of all who are capable of feeling, when emotions of gratitude have passed over the soul like a fresh torrent over the parched and arid soil, leaving beauty and fertility in its track. To find in the midst of trouble, that some one, of whose kindness we had never dreamed, has been making interest in our favor; that some friend has been secretly working for our good; that a sister or a brother has been making some sacrifice to serve us; that a father or a mother has been praying for us when we have gone astray; and when one or all of these discoveries have been made, to throw open our hearts without suspicion and without reserve before our benefactors, so as to let them see. and feel our gratitude—surely this does good alike to "him that gives," as well as to the grateful recipient of such kindness.

It must do good; for there is no sensation approaching

title: Page:The Mothers of England.djvu/74


text:
Page:The Mothers of England.djvu/75

70 nearly to that which the scheme of man's salvation is calculated to inspire in the breast of the true believer, as that of intense and fervent gratitude; and, blessed be God, there is no sensation so nearly allied to perfect happiness. Here then is benevolence—here is mercy—here is cause for gratitude on earth and praise in heaven! that the very feeling by which the Christian is most closely bound to the service of his Maker, is that which, throughout all human nature, is the most intimately associated with the purest enjoyment.

That real gratitude—that to which the heart surrenders itself without reserve—is the happiest sensation experienced on earth, we have probably all felt at different times, and in a manner adapted to our own habits and associations—some on entering the house of prayer, some on the recovery of a beloved friend from illness, some on returning home, and some on going forth under favorable auspices; while others have found themselves most overpowered by emotions of gratitude, they scarcely know how, or why. Perhaps in a solitary walk over green fields on a summer's day, they have paused by a rivulet, to gaze upon half-hidden flowers, and to listen to the hum of the wandering bee, until, startled by a softer note, they have looked up, and seen the wood-pigeon sitting in the boughs of a tall tree, through which the sunlight glistened. And then, undisturbed by these sweet natural sounds and sights, a solemn stillness has fallen upon their souls; and while a vision of deep thought has made evident the presence of the Supreme, the Infinite, the Allwise, they have felt themselves remembered—cared for—kept as it were in the hollow of his hand; and thus they have poured forth their gratitude in prayer, such as falls again like dew upon the heart from which it springs.

Oh! who would exchange such moments for the wealth of worlds!—or who, if by any effort of love, they could be procured for others, would not begin in early childhood to cultivate a soil which is capable of producing so rich a harvest of pure and invigorating joy?

title: Page:The Mothers of England.djvu/75


text: The Mothers of England/Chapter V

title: The Mothers of England/Chapter V


text:
Page:Evolution of the thermometer.djvu/50

 aer calidus, magnus calor;" and the large sphere above the tube was inscribed "Mobile perpetuum."

De Guericke constructed a barometer on similar lines, and gave it the legend "Semper vivum;" he described it in a letter to G. Schott, dated 30 December, 1661.

Still more remarkable was the self-registering meteorological apparatus devised by the great German physicist; it recorded every hour the change in temperature, direction of the wind, the rainfall, and amount of snow or hail. Monconys describes this briefly, with a diagram showing the arrangement, in his Journal des Voyages (Vol. III, 1663).

The differential thermometer was invented by Gaspar Schott, as early as 1657 (Mechan. hydraul-pneumat. II, 231), and afterwards improved by Joh. Christ. Sturm, Professor in Altorf, Bavaria, in 1676. It was a U-tube with arms of uneven length, both tubes being closed; Sturm explained its action quite correctly.

In the latter part of the seventeenth century references in scientific literature to the construction and use of the ordinary thermoscopes multiplied; Le Febure in his admirable


text:
Page:Evolution of the thermometer.djvu/51

 on chemistry (1669), mentions the thermometer as a well-known instrument, and Gabriel Clauder in the "Miscellanea curiosa Acad. nat. curiosa" (Dec. 2, Anno 6, p. 351, 1687), describes a "thermoscopium noviter inventum " adapted to immersion in liquids.

There was published at Amsterdam, in 1688, an illustrated work entirely devoted to barometers, thermometers, and hygrometers, written by Dalencé, who concealed his name under the initial D——. I have already referred to this interesting book in connection with the Drebbel myth, but it deserves emphasizing, for it contains an imperfect summary of thermometrical knowledge up to that date; to avoid repetition, however, I shall only notice items not previously given here.

Dalencé describes the Italian thermoscope as having a bulb the size of a pigeon egg and a tube as big as a quill pen; he suggests the use of a mixture of three parts of water with one of aqua fortis to prevent the liquid freezing, and a flattened bulb to permit heat, or cold, more readily to penetrate the centre of the liquid. He proposed, also, that two points should be marked on the scale, the freezing-point of water, to be marked "cold," and the


text:
Page:The Mothers of England.djvu/76

Rh

the first view of the subjects which are to occupy this chapter, it would almost seem to be a waste of words to commend them to the reader's notice, so uniformly is the opinion of mankind engaged in their favor. A vast amount of praise, however, is sometimes lavished upon acts of generosity,, without considering what it is we are actually praising.

Children should never be commended for giving what costs them no sacrifice to part with. Where this rule is not observed, we often see a spurious kind of generosity prevailing in families, the members of which grow up with a mistaken notion, that in the mere act of giving, there is a degree of merit upon which they congratulate themselves, when, in reality, they have only been enjoying the highest of all luxuries.

In order to obviate some of the evils arising out of this mistake, children should early be taught to offer a part of their sweetmeats to each other, but especially to their parents; and what is more, the parents should actually take what is offered—not merely that tiny crumb which the tender mother breaks off, and with disproportioned thanks pretends to eat. This method of commending generosity does a two-fold injury; in the first place, by deceiving the child into a belief that it is generous, when it is not; and in the second, by inducing a confidence that it will suffer no loss by the effort it is making. We should be sincere with children in acts, as well as in words. Parents ought therefore not only to take a crumb, but occasionally a good large portion of what is offered them, so as to produce in the minds of their children a conviction, which will be of infinite service to them in after life, that the true value of all generosity consists in the good it imparts to others, not in the credit it procures for ourselves.

title: Page:The Mothers of England.djvu/76


text:
Page:The Mothers of England.djvu/77

72 It is not difficult to discover when a false system of pretended giving and pretended taking has been practised in a family, by the blank and disappointed look of the little giver, if a portion unexpectedly large is taken from its hand; as well as by the trembling and hesitation of that hand, and the fearfulness with which it is drawn back, the next time the ceremony of pretended giving has to be performed toward the individual who happened previously to take too much. Never, it may safely be said, were the elements of a truly generous character unfolded and brought to perfection by such a system as this—a system which, so far as it encouraged self-deception, and the substitution of mere pretence for what is real, just, and true, is exactly so much worse than absolute greediness.

If children must be greedy, let them by all means run first into the garden, and devour the ripe fruit before any one else has discovered that it is ripe; but do not let them come in to offer a small portion of it to mamma, in order to obtain her praises, though all the while feeling perfectly secure against any diminution of their own selfish enjoyment.

There is no need, however, that children should be greedy; because it is in the power of almost every mother, to teach them that there is a higher enjoyment than that of merely satisfying their own appetites. Suppose, for instance, it should be the established rule in a family that all first fruits should be offered to the parents, and that they should be appropriated entirely, but still thankfully, by them;—received simply as their due, but still acknowledged with every token of affection. For those self-devoted and uncalculating mothers, to whom allusion has been made, I am aware it would be difficult to do this, or to maintain any rule by which they would themselves be made first in their children's consideration; but could they once be made witnesses of that higher, purer joy, which pervades the soul of a young child on having learned that it is "more blessed to give than to receive," they would surely not deny them the cultivation of so lasting a source of real happiness.

title: Page:The Mothers of England.djvu/77


text:
Page:Evolution of the thermometer.djvu/52

 melting-point of butter; the space between them to be divided equally and the centre to be marked "temperate." Then each space above and below "temperate" to be divided into ten equal degrees, four additional degrees to be placed above the melting-point of butter and four below the freezing-point of water, making a scale of thirty degrees in all.

He further proposed another standard scale, the fixed points to be the temperature of a cellar and of ice, the space between to be divided into fifteen degrees; and he added: "all thermometers made by the latter method are comparable." To make instruments easy of transportation, and for fancy, the stems were bent into circular, oval, spiral, triangular, and stellate shapes, and Dalencé gives figures of each. He also described the floating glass bulbs of. Kircher, and made them in the shape of turtles to apply to the arms and body of feverish persons. "Some curieux" he says, "use mercury in thermometers," but the instrument he writes of was an air-thermoscope and the fluid metal was not employed on account of its


text:
Page:The Mothers of England.djvu/78

Rh On this subject, especially, those kind and unthinking mothers are apt to fall into an endless train of errors, simply from yielding to a natural impulse to produce immediate results of a gratifying nature. Thus the supply of money to children for the purpose of making presents, for which they obtain all the thanks, and all the credit, is practised to a most injurious extent. I do not mean to say that children should never be allowed to give, until they have money or property of their own; but when they do, it should be in the name of their parents, and on no account should they take merit to themselves as if they had done a generous act.

It is a sacred duty with all who have to do with the moral improvement of their fellow-creatures, to watch over motives, as well as actions; and as regards the young, to see that they do not grow up deceiving themselves as to what their motives really are. Under no pretence is self-deception more frequently practised, than under that of generosity, as well as general kindness. There may be many selfish motives for doing generous actions, such as reference to our own ultimate benefit in what we do; but the mistake I would especially point out, refers to our immediate motives, or rather to the direct impulse upon which we act. The direct impulse to act kindly, may be a desire to relieve the suffering of others; or it may be only a desire to relieve our own sufferings in the contemplation of distress.

Perhaps I shall make my meaning better understood, by the case of a young lady, who believed herself, and was generally believed, to be exceedingly charitable and kind; and who sometimes returned home on a Saturday afternoon after visiting the poor, so impressed with a painful sense of their wants and sufferings, that for one there was fruit to be gathered, for another gruel made, while to a third or a fourth, honey and jelly had to be sent out that night. Now if we add, that never, on the Monday morning, or early in the week, when servants were more at liberty, could the same young lady remember to supply the necessities of her afflicted friends, it will be clearly

title: Page:The Mothers of England.djvu/78


text:
Page:Evolution of the thermometer.djvu/53

 of expansion. Dalencé praised the skill of Sieur Hubin, glass-blower, whose address was Rue St. Martin, Paris, and says his success is due to the fact that "he knows the reasons for that which he does."

The sections in Dalencé's work on the barometer and hygrometer are interesting from the historical point of view, but do not fall within the province of these chapters.

Dalencé seldom gives credit to individuals for their shares in the development of the instruments he describes, and it is difficult to determine how many of the improvements mentioned by him were original with him, probably but few.

Mention may be here made of a complicated thermometer constructed by the expert Parisian glass-blower Hubin, although it was not described in print until 1725 (Reyher, Pneumatica). Two bulbed tubes were united at a reservoir, and bent in the shape of an U; both tubes were closed so that the apparatus was independent of air-pressure. The shorter arm of the U was filled with mercury up to the centre of the reservoir, the longer arm half filled with water, the remaining half, including the large bulb, containing air. When the


text:
Page:Evolution of the thermometer.djvu/54

 air in the bulb expanded, it pressed upon the column of water which in turn forced the mercury up the shorter and wider tube. Hubin claimed for this instrument greater delicacy than the Florentine in the proportion of 216 to 4, as determined by experiment.

The question, who first used quicksilver as the dilating liquid in thermometers, is apparently a simple one, to be easily answered, but like many other questions of priority in the history of the thermometer, many claims have been advanced and the problem requires examination; no less than ten names are mentioned by different authorities as inventors of mercury thermometers. Thermometers containing mercury were indeed made at an early date, but the liquid metal was only an accessory to the air-thermoscope and was not used as a heat-measurer.

Athanasius Kircher, in 1643, mentions a thermoscope containing mercury, but does not describe the function of the liquid metal. The Accademia del Cimento, as related in the diary of the society, made mercury thermometers in 1657, compared them with water-thermometers of the same size, and observed that the former fell and rose more quickly than the latter when


text:
Page:Evolution of the thermometer.djvu/55

 affected by changes of temperature, although the total amount was less; but this important fact lay dormant and unused.

Mercury thermometers were also known in Paris; Ismael Boulliau is said to have made them in 1659; and a letter dated 28th May, 1684, written in Paris to the Royal Society, London, by Mr. Musgrave, describes one three inches long and five lines in diameter, that was used for taking the temperature of fever patients.

Christian Huyghens, in 1665, and Dalencé, in 1668, are also credited with the invention of mercury thermometers. In the same year that Dalencé's book appeared, Edmund Halley, the eminent English mathematician and astronomer, was studying experimentally the relative expansion of water, alcohol and mercury, and he stated that mercury would make a good thermometrical liquid if its coefficient of expansion was greater; he did not actually recommend the liquid metal, although he perceived that its expansion was large enough to influence the readings of the barometer. He observed that mercury heated in boiling water ceased to expand on long continuing the operation, and according to Momber he proposed taking the boiling-point of water as a fixed


text:
Page:Evolution of the thermometer.djvu/56

 point, but Poggendorff says he made no application of this fact to thermometry. Halley thought that "spirit of wine" lost part of its expansive force by long keeping, yet he proposed the boiling-point of alcohol as a limit to thermometrical scales. The English scientist felt the need of a reliable thermometer scale and expressed himself in somewhat the same way as his countryman Boyle had done, fourteen years before: "I cannot learn that any thermometer of either sort was ever made or adjusted so as it might be concluded what the degrees or divisions of the said instrument did mean; neither were any thermometers ever otherwise graduated but by standards kept by each particular workman without any agreement or reference to one another. So that whenever observations of a thermometer are made by any curious person to signify the degree of heat in the air or other thing they cannot be understood, unless by those who have by them thermometers of the same make and adjustment."

Halley regarded the freezing-points of aniseed oil, and of water, as unreliable, and preferred as a starting point the temperature of a deep cellar the constancy of which had been


text:
Page:The Mothers of England.djvu/79

74 understood that her efforts were simply to relieve the pain of her own feelings in witnessing distress, while so soon as this pain had subsided or lost its acuteness, the sufferings of the poor ceased to supply a motive strong enough for the exercise of her generosity. But let us not think too severely of this case, without asking, in how many instances the conduct of the young lady here described, resembles our own.

I am aware that this subject lies open to the cavillings of those most fruitless reasoners, who, after pursuing a round of arguments, congratulate themselves at last, upon having arrived at the senseless conclusion, that all kindness is selfish, because it originates in an impulse to gratify ourselves by relieving distress, or doing good in some other way. Though such a mode of arguing is scarcely worthy of a moment's serious notice, yet as it sometimes catches the attention of those who do not take the trouble to think for themselves, it may be well to point out a distinction betwixt those kind actions which are really selfish, and those which are not. Those actions, then, may properly be called selfish, which in the mind of the performer have reference only to self; and those may with great justice be called unselfish, which have reference only to others. Thus the performer of kind or generous actions, whose sole inducement is the luxury expected to be derived therefrom—a luxury consisting either in witnessing enjoyment of his own creating, or in receiving the praise or the gratitude of others; such a man, though ostensibly a 'benefactor to his race, might' with some propriety be called selfish; a title which it would be a mockery of language to bestow upon one, who should be so intent upon the relief of suffering, or upon the gratification of others, as never once to have thought of self, or of any other result than what should belong exclusively to the party served. Though the real enjoyment of such a person would be as high, nay, far higher than that of the other, yet their motives being essentially different, it would be worse than folly to place them in the same rank as moral agents; and whenever we would commend or encourage

title: Page:The Mothers of England.djvu/79


text:
Page:Evolution of the thermometer.djvu/57

 by De la Hire in the crypt of the Paris observatory.

Christian Wolf, of Halle, and Olof Römer, of Copenhagen, both in 1709, are also named as the first to use mercury as a heat measuring liquid, but in spite of these many claimants the fact remains that Fahrenheit, in 1714, was incontestably the first to construct mercury thermometers having reliable scales. But this anticipates.

The need of a standard scale, easily made and based on constant phenomena that can be reproduced at will, was felt by all who used thermometers, and an important practical proposal to secure this desideratum was made in 1694 by Carlo Renaldini, a former member of the Accademia del Cimento. and professor of mathematics in Padua. At that date, and in the eightieth year of his age, he published a work on natural philosophy, in which he suggested taking the melting-point of ice and the boiling-point of water for two fixed points of thermometer scales, and dividing the space between them into twelve equal parts. This truly admirable proposition was not appreciated by his contemporaries who did not wholly believe in the constancy of these temperatures, and it was


text:
Page:Evolution of the thermometer.djvu/58

 forgotten by succeeding philosophers, thus delaying greatly accurate observations of temperature.

Dalencé had anticipated Renaldini in adopting the principle of the subdivision of the interval between two determinable points, but the phenomena chosen by the Frenchman were not so reliable as those proposed by the Italian, which were afterwards adopted by Celsius.

Renaldini devised another method for graduating thermometers; he plunged the thermometer to be graduated first in mashed ice, then in a mixture of eleven parts cold water plus one of boiling water, and successively in mixtures of ten cold plus two boiling, nine cold plus three boiling, eight cold plus four boiling, and lastly in boiling water itself, marking on the scale the position of the expanding fluid at each immersion. This sounds plausible, but was shown by Wolff to be deceptive and unreliable.

Sir Isaac Newton was one of those who attacked the thermometrical problem of the age, but the scale proposed by this great genius was by no means satisfactory; he rejected alcohol as the dilating liquid and preferred "lintseed" oil; for fixed points in the scale he chose the


text:
Page:The Mothers of England.djvu/80

Rh the generosity of the young, we ought to examine well the true state of the case, in order to ascertain which of these two motives has been in operation.

"If we attempt to teach children," says Miss Edgeworth, "that they can be generous without giving up some of their own pleasures for the sake of other people, we attempt to teach them what is false. If we once make them amends for any sacrifice they have made, we lead them to expect the same remuneration on a future occasion; and then, in fact, they act with a direct view to their own interest, and govern themselves by the calculations of prudence, instead of following the dictates of benevolence. It is true, that if we speak with accuracy, we must admit, that the most benevolent and generous persons act from the hope of receiving pleasure, and their enjoyment is more exquisite than the most refined selfishness: in the language of M. de Rochefoucault, we should be therefore forced to acknowledge, that the most benevolent is always the most selfish person. This seeming paradox is answered by observing, that the epithet selfish is given to those who prefer pleasures in which other people have no share; we change the meaning of words when we talk of its being selfish to like the pleasures of sympathy and benevolence, because these pleasures can not be confined solely to the idea of self. When we say that a person pursues his own interest more by being generous than by being covetous, we take into account the general sum of his agreeable feelings, we do not balance prudentially his loss or gain upon particular occasions. The generous man may himself be convinced, that the sum of his happiness is more increased by the feelings of benevolence, than it could be by the gratification of avarice; but, though his understanding may perceive the demonstration of this moral theorem, though it is the remote principle of his whole conduct, it does not occur to his memory in the form of a prudential aphorism, whenever he is going to do a generous action. It is essential to our ideas of generosity, that no such reasoning should at that moment pass in his mind; we know that

title: Page:The Mothers of England.djvu/80


text:
Page:The Mothers of England.djvu/81

76 the feelings of generosity are associated with a number of enthusiastic ideas; we can sympathise with the virtuous insanity of the man who forgets himself while he thinks of others; we do not so readily sympathise with the cold strength of mind of the person, who, deliberately preferring the greatest possible share of happiness, is benevolent by rule and measure."

All making of presents with the parent's money, all giving for the mere luxury of the giver, should then be studiously avoided in the management of children; while, on the other hand, all real kindness, all giving up of selfish gratification purely for the sake of doing good to others, ought to be as studiously encouraged, and rewarded with indubitable marks of approbation.

As one means of preventing young people acquiring a habit of acting from that spurious kind of generosity which has just been described, it is well not to make them too frequent spectators of the sufferings of the poor and destitute, at an age when they are incapable, by their own efforts, of doing anything toward alleviating the distress they see; for while, with some dispositions, there is danger that their feelings should be rendered callous by the frequency of such spectacles; with others, there is equal danger of acquiring a habit of seeking the relief of the suffering under the pretence of kindness, when the chief or only motive of such kindness is the relief of their own feelings. To accustom children to remember the poor when not present, to lay by for their relief, some portion of the money given for their own use, or to spend a little time now and then, in working for their comfort, is a far more likely method of inspiring sentiments of true kindness, then merely to encourage them to be kind or generous at the time when their feelings are worked upon by the presence of distress.

In making free use of the expressions praise and blame, I should be sorry to be understood to mean that the approbation, even of a mother, should become the leading motive, in the conduct of a child, beyond that early stage of its existence, when it is incapable of

title: Page:The Mothers of England.djvu/81


text:
Page:The Mothers of England.djvu/82

Rh any other. A mother's approbation, however, may often be made use of as a natural and appropriate reward, and this without any of those direct but disproportioned praises which induce an idea of peculiar merit on the part of a child. Happily for the mother, nature has given her the use of a purer language than that of praise, in which she may hold sweet communion with the soul of her child. It is that of sympathy, which should never be withheld. "It is safer," says Miss Hamilton, "to sympathize with children than to praise them;" and a mother, above all other beings has perpetually at her command, those innumerable links in the great chain of sympathy, which consist of peculiar tones of voice, caresses, looks, and familiar expressions, down to the minutest touch which thrills along the chords of feeling, and produces an answering. echo, true to nature's sweetest music, from the tender and unsophisticated spirit of the child.

We should be careful, too, in the use of maternal approbation, lest children, who have built too much upon this as their reward, should grow up with an inordinate thirst for approbation in general; for though we justly grieve over the situation of a being so isolated and shut out from kindly sympathies, as not to regard the praise or blame of others; yet it is but too evident, from the observation of every day, that no human beings are so often exposed to disappointment, and none in reality so weak, as those who derive their highest satisfaction from the approbation of their fellow-creatures.

Still, in connexion with a mother's influence, and with the natural means which are placed within her power for exercising that influence in the management of her children, it must be allowed that praise and blame are legitimate instruments capable of being used with the most beneficial effect by a judicious woman. For, after all, a system of praise and blame seems to be that which is most adapted to our weakness; in consideration to which, we have been taught by the word of God, to look for consolation and support, less as moral agents to the intrinsic

title: Page:The Mothers of England.djvu/82


text:
Page:The Mothers of England.djvu/83

78 excellence of the divine law as promualgated in the Scriptures, than simply as little children, to the approbation of our Father who is in heaven.

In confining our ideas of generosity, as is too frequently the case, to the mere act of giving, we take but a very low and partial view of the subject as it affects individual conduct, and as it affects the interests of society in general. We are often made to feel a want of generosity in the behavior of our friends, where there is no giving; and in nothing are we more susceptible of this, than in the treatment of our feelings. There are many friends who will give to us abundantly—there may be some who would share with us their last shilling; but there are not many who will pour the balm of affection into wounds we are justly suffering from disappointed vanity; there are not many who will screen us with tenderness from the exposure of our own folly; and there are still fewer who will rob themselves of a little credit, for the sake of giving us our full share, or more. There are not many either, who can always refrain from reproaching penitence, and triumphing over humiliation, from pursuing a victory with exultation, or from dragging to light the secret sins of a rival. Yet all this belongs to the exercise of true generosity, and is often more touching to the heart a thousand times, than to be the recipient of unnumbered benefits.

To attempt to give any particular direction for the cultivation of this kind of generosity, would be to presume a little beyond the sphere of education; because it must depend so entirely upon the characters of those who have the training of children, and upon the spirit which is cherished around the domestic hearth. One rule, however, may be safely laid down, and that is, never to use taunting or reproachful expressions to children for offences committed, after such atonement as lies within their power has been made—never to wound beyond what is absolutely necessary for correction, nor to allow the guilty to be put down and degraded more than is essential to their future good. To this may be added, a strict embargo laid upon the exchange of all low thoughts or vulgar

title: Page:The Mothers of England.djvu/83


text:
Page:The Mothers of England.djvu/84

Rh, in the nursery; such as personal remarks upon other people's children, made to please the mother, by bringing them into disadvantageous comparison with her own; observations upon dress and manners, furniture, carriages, and equipments, calculated to inspire in the minds of children false ideas of the value of wealth, and consequently a false estimate of individual character. All these, though they may on the first view of the subject seem to have little to do with generosity, are parts of a whole—elements of that domestic atmosphere which childhood can not breathe without more or less expansion of soul; and it is scarcely necessary to say, that the low style of thought and conversation here alluded to, is one of the last ingredients we should look for in the formation of a truly generous character.

In connexion with this subject, we must not forget to observe, that there is a grudging way of doing kindnesses, even to children, which must have an injurious effect as regards generosity of feeling. Some parents, too, will not make them any just allowance of money, even when they are of an age to understand its value, but on every application for necessary expenses, will grumble as much as if they were actually robbed; while others, or most probably the same individuals, will, in making presents to their children, dwell so much upon the cost, the trouble, and the inconvenience incurred, as to throw over the receivers of such gifts an air of meanness, for being willing to accept, as a means of selfish gratification, what has been purchased so dearly by another.

Whatever is given, then, should be given freely, in order that it may be freely received; for as regards the moral training of children, it is better a thousand times to let them see and feel the difference between grudging and generosity, than to mix up the two ideas in their minds, by accustoming them to be the subjects of generous actions, performed in a grudging spirit.

It is a safe plan, too, for parents never to make any direct reference to desert, in conferring gifts or benefits upon their children; because, independently of real merit

title: Page:The Mothers of England.djvu/84