纽约及其火灾隐患。
最近的几期《哈伯周刊》上刊登了一篇题为《纽约的火灾危险》的插图文章，文章的标题是克罗克酋长。就印刷版而言，它所传达的信息告诉读者的一切，都是副局长邦纳在担任该部门主管时，在这些专栏中一再向世界提供的。唯一值得注意的是克罗克酋长在他的论断中表现出的公鸡般的自信，其中最明显的例子也许就是他那武断的断言:“炸药或其他炸药无法扑灭火。”我相信这一点。”这是他当真的克洛克局长的决定吗?难道他没有看到这为争论开辟了一个相当广泛的领域吗?克罗克局长一定是忘了他在用炸药炸毁建筑物方面的经验是零。因此，他的观点只能建立在道听途说的基础上——除非有可靠的证据支持，否则这充其量是一个不可靠的基础。与此相反，我们可以引用消防员的经验，他们至少在能力上与他相当，在经验上与他的上级相当。任何这样的观点，特别是一个如此肯定地断言的观点，都可能被认为会被支持它的论据所强化。 The only one, however, that is brought forward is that of the great fire of 1835 in New York city —and that proves nothing. In the first place, during the seventy years that have elapsed since that fire, expert research into and careful study of the nature of explosives have reduced their use and results nearly to an exact science. In 1835 and for many years after explosions were employed in the crudest and most haphazard way, and often did more harm than good. But, with the discovery of guncotton, nitro-glycerine, dynamite and the like and the substitution of electricity for the oldfashioned time and other fuses, the whole art of employing such agencies was revolutionised, with a corresponding benefit to the fire service. Again, it was gunpowder that was used in these days. Today it is dynamite— a very different agent, w'hose properties and effects, as Chief Croker can learn for himself, are altogether unlike those of gunpow'der, except, perhaps, in their powers of destruction, and even in these the former are more effective. Gunpow der detonation is upwards and lateral, and is, besides, accompanied with a large amount of deflagration, the result being to spread the flames, with danger to life and property through flying embers and sparks—to say nothing of exposing the firemen and others to the risk of asphyxiation from its fumes and smoke. Dynamite detonation, on the contrary, is downwards, and deflagration, fumes and smoke are reduced to a minimum. There is also an absence of the flight of burning embers and sparks. It must not be supposed, however, from this, that the writer advocates the use of explosives as a general thing. To apply such means is a desperate remedy, when the disease— in this case, tire—has grown desperate, owing to the lack of proper firefighting facilities, or, as in the case of San Francisco, when the water supply has utterly given out, or has been cut off by an earthquake or some other unexpected cause.
至于文章附带的插图，它们不仅完全没有任何艺术价值，而且荒谬得令人鄙视。他们应该代表一个顽固的火011 water-trout,救火船的纽约人在前台协助发动机上岸,一个“火在零的天气,税收最大的消防部门的效率,“冷静熊熊大火准备发送男性对顶的上是瞬间战斗,通过烟”以及“在教学学校工作的结果——拯救一名被困在三楼的房客。”至于第一个例子:缺乏透视视角对眼睛来说是痛苦的。《纽约客》被塑造得像一艘巨大的远洋轮船一样大，而靠近海岸的消防船抛出的水流的大小几乎相当于一英寸1.25英寸的喷嘴所能看到的大小。第二个说明,测试最大效率的消防员,显示他们采取非常冷静的过程因此“试验到底,”首席官站在Ins的手在口袋里平静地谈论一名消防队员,软管和tnose不忙,在简单的态度。可能少了一点惰性是由消防员显示的，谁被描绘为冷却在一个地下室的熊熊大火，然后在近距离战斗!但酒窖必须靠信念来把握，与此同时，里拉似乎在按自己的方式发展。从最后的插图，没有任何指示可以获得，无论是读者或任何消防员谁可能希望从它获得信息。如果有人被抬下了梯子，那就撒谎，或者干脆让人看不见她，唯一引人注目的人物就是那三个消防队员，而且，除非这一截下面有说明，说明这是什么意思，否则谁也说不出他们在做什么。 It may also lie pointed out that any superior officer that would permit the use of a ladder that sags as does the one in the picture, should be brought up on charges for exposing his men to almost certain death. The illustrations, taken severally, or as a whole, are so misleading that the only surprise is that Chief Croker should have allowed them to appear at all. or permitted his name to be attached to an article that, even without them, is of no use from the standpoint of instructiveness, and, with them, simply exposes the water, the artist, and the publishers to ridicule.
