7 



" Well, if \uu object, siiyhLly paraphrase it and say, ' Wlial the 

 devil il's doiny here ' — Goodness only knows." 



Al all events, it cannot be doing the impossible. 



In a gymnasium one can easily understand the bar (cni whu h the 

 gymnast circles) being furnished, as it often is, with a steel core, 

 possibly one third of an inch in diameter, but there is no comjiarison 

 in this. The bar has to stand infinitely rougher work ; it has to 

 sustain great weight and very severe strain, and hardly bends either 

 \va\- more than an inch or so out of its normal position. Strength, 

 then, is the object sought for and undoubtedly attained by this mode 

 of arrangement. 



But is this the end sought for in a rod? I low can its supporters 

 maintain such a contention ? They assert that the flexibility or 

 li\ eliness, as well as the strength of the rod, is thereb}' increased. We 

 should like to ask them to explain in what way the bending of the 

 outer case is affected by the infinitely greater flexibility of the inner 

 core. In casting, of course, the strain affects the bend of the cane ; 

 but the strain is primarily u]ion the outer surface, and subsecjuently 

 upon the inner particles only so far as they are part and parcel of the 

 whole. By no manner of means can a man make the steel cen I red 

 rod benil sufficiently for the wire to lend the least possible aid. 



The core in the gymnastic bar resists the bend, but increases the 

 spring, and this is eminently satisfactory for the purpose to which the 

 bar is put. 



But how can one imagine thai tin's thin piece of wire, six feet in 

 length, can assist in the action of the cane? Supposing it were fixed 

 at each end of a joint, the action of the cane would be considerably 

 curtailed ; and if not fixed, it would have free play inside the cane, in 



