The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1895-07-06

IN minor details and to accept as true
the errors or imaginings Of their prede-
cessors. q contributor to the st. Louis
Globe-Democrat says:
In this way a thousand myths. which
had but the remotest basis OF truth. II
any. for foundation. have been indus
triously repeated and conscientiously
believed by thousands. Thus the yarn
about George Washington and his little
hatchet. which was originally pure
fabrication. Is as religiously believed by
young Americans as was the story
about Romulus and Remus being
sucked by wolf by the young Romans
couple Of thousand years ago So also
in England 1t IL the fashion to believe
that, at the battle OF Waterloo. the Iron
Duke said up guards. and at them."
though the Duke himself testified that
he said nothing Of the kind. being too
busy praying that Blucher or night
might come before Napoleon thrashed
his army all to pieces. The idea that
George Ill. was cruel. blood-thirsty
tyrant. who went about his palace with
q Fee-FoO-Fum aspect, smiling the
blood Of Americans. was sedulously In
culcated by the declaration Of indie
pendence, when. on the contrary, he
was Z mild-mannered old gentleman.
who would not have hurt anybody's
feelings for the world. and who would
turn over In his grave did he but know
how grossly he had been misrepresent-
ID On this side Of the water. But his
tory - full Of just sudh blunders. and
In spite Of the fact that Curtius did not
heap Anto the gulf. nor did Mucius Scae-
VIOLA plunge his hand into the fire. nor
the Horatii put up the gallant fight
credited to them, nor did Nero fiddle
while Rome was burning. nor the priest
Of Louis XVI. say, "Son Of st. Louis.
ascend to heaven" people will go on be-
lfeving these things. though they be
disproved a hundred times. simply be-
cause the historians have got into the
fashion Of telling them, and they look
pretty when put in type.
Novslists' Bluuders.
If blunders like these are perpetuated
In history simply by dint OF the public
stupidity. greater accuracy In matters
OF statement and closer adherence to
dhe probabilities are not to be expected
cf the novelist. The writer Of fiction
creates his own history, for, to him, the
characters he presents are as real as
any that ever lived; the scenes he de-
picts are, for the moment, as true as
any that ever appeared on the stage Of
tife's action. He is, In fact, writing
history as 1t should be; but as he Is
under the necessity Of manufacturing
1t a. he goes, 1t is not wonderful that
aapses Of memory should here and there
occur and his pictures be blurred by his
own forgetfulness. OF all sinners in
this respect Thackeray confesses him
self to be the chief In writing on the
subject. lhe owns up to y score Of delin-
Quencies. He said: "As sure as read
page Of my own composition, find q
fault or two half Q dozen. Jones is
called Brown. Brown, who Is dead, is'
brought to life. Aghast, and months
after the number was printed, saw
HAD called Philip Firmin, Give New
come. Now, Give Newcome is the hero
OF another story by the readers most
obedient servant. The two men are as
different in my minds eye as Lord Pal
merston and Mr.. Disraeli.'
Scientific Mistakes.
When noveMsts make such blunders
IN Dealing with the creatures of their
own brains, It Is not wonderful that
when scientific accuracy is demanded
they should err even more eeregiously.
me catastrophe In the mill on the
Fios 70 brought on by q scientific
olunder. The gifted author gives her
readers to understand that the boat in
which the heroine and her brother were
noaung was overwhelmed by a huge
mass OF debris which was travelling
oown stream at more rapid rate than
the IRAN craft. OF course, then. 1t over
TOOK the boat and sank It by the force
OF the collision. The incident is dra-
matte enough to satisfy the most criti-
cal, but scientifically It Is an albsurdity.
Tor the two were borne along by the
same stream the pile Of wreckage went
- fast as the boat, and not a. whit
raster. no matter what might be the
neeos OF the situation. Equally open to
sclsnenio criticism Is that appalling
sosns In "B1eak House." where the un-
fortunate drunkard died horrible
osath from spontaneous combustion.
NO doubt he deserved to get out of the
worlo IN some such dreadful fashion,
ana Dickens. having read Of cases of
orunkards who went to bedin a normal
condition and were found a few hours
later pile Of charred flesh and cinders,
considered that he had accomplished
q master stroke in bringing about such
. result In the case Of his own partic-
ular drunkard, but the fact remains
that no matter how rum-soaked a hu-
man being may become, no one ever
d1ed OF spontaneous combustion, and,
DO long a. the human system is more
than thres-fourths water, no one ever
viii.
Neve1ists asd Astronomy.
When dealing with technical subjects.
novelists are peculiarly liable to 20 as
tray, not only from the fact that they
generally have no scientific special
training, but also because they do not
possess that peculiar quality of mind
that predisp0sss Q man towards scien-
tif1c research. For It ID true that there
10 scientific cast Of mind, just az there
10 an imaginative or critical or revsr-
ential type. The novelist IL not a
scientist. and rarely can he become 80.
and not infrequently, in the effort to
make his science At the story, he per-
petrates the most outrageous mistakes.
The late Professor Proctor devoted a
long article to curious blunder made
BY Charles Reade when the latter un-
dertook. in Foul Play" to describe
the proper method Of computing longi-
tuds. After showing how grossly at
fauK was the description OF the novel.
he Proctor lamented the tendency
among writer's Of fiction to attempt to
deal with scientific processes with which
they were unfamiliar. for. as he says.
1t u remarkable that people who pay
no attention to a acienfiflc descri,fioy,