296 A nalyses of Books, f M ay, 
assertion was based, his letter was consigned to the waste-paper 
basket. 
Sir Jacob is, in short, an influential, prosperous humbug. He 
edits journals, political, literary, “ society,” and even — proh 
pudor ! — scientific. He is on the council of our learned societies, 
and always recommends himself for re-eledtion. He is adtive in 
organising exhibitions, and some even say that he is the unseen 
head of a “ department.” 
Mr. Edwards appears to have come in collision with this evil 
genius. He, too, has occasionally written to expose some error 
or absurdity, but Sir Jacob's influence was sufficient to ensure the 
rejection of his communications. 
The author’s proposals for the better economy of heat are for 
the most part highly judicious. He recommends for windows 
double panes of glass, placed about a quarter of an inch apart, 
or, for larger rooms, double sashes with an interval of five to six 
inches. Experience in various countries has abundantly proved 
that such arrangements materially check the loss of heat in 
winter. At the same time they involve a loss of light, an article 
not too abundant in the narrow streets of our smoky cities. And 
as long as the woodwork of the windows and doors is executed 
by “ contracting ” masters and trades’-unionist workmen, so long 
will it admit plentiful currents of cold air. A more important 
feature is the proposal to utilise the warm air from the fires in 
the lower stories of a house, for the benefit of the rooms situate 
above them. It is generally admitted that from three-fourths to 
seven-eighths of the heat evolved by combustion of coal, in our 
open grates, escapes up the chimney. But here it is confined 
within a stack of masonry of such thickness that its effedt upon 
the temperature of the rooms above is pradtically null. Mr. 
Edwards proposes to convey it upwards by means of cast-iron 
pipes, so that it may give off a large proportion of its heat in the 
house. We like this proposal ; but we doubt whether it is ca- 
pable of adaptation to houses already built. In another respedt 
we are compelled to differ from him. He thinks it hopeless to 
induce the English public to take to close stoves. We reply that 
the experiment has never been fairly made with the earthenware 
stoves used in various parts of the Continent, which have many 
advantages over those of iron. 
Mr. Edwards criticises certain recent proposals and improve- 
ments, so-called, for warming dwelling-houses in a masterly 
manner. He shows the absurdity of the fire-grates on a level 
with the floor, which, in utter defiance of scientific principles, 
have been foisted upon the public within the last half-century* 
This is the fatal objection to the “ Country Parson’s Grate,” 
which, in addition, requires a very high class of fuel. It has, 
however, the advantage, as our author shows, of minimising the 
quantity of iron placed in contadt with the fire. The “ Norwich” 
or “ Slow Combustion Stove ” has the defedt of a solid bottom 
