But I and my chimney must explain; and as we are both rather
obese, we may have to expatiate.

In those houses which are strictly double houses--that is, where
the hall is in the middle--the fireplaces usually are on opposite
sides; so that while one member of the household is warming
himself at a fire built into a recess of the north wall, say
another member, the former's own brother, perhaps, may be holding
his feet to the blaze before a hearth in the south wall--the two
thus fairly sitting back to back. Is this well? Be it put to any
man who has a proper fraternal feeling. Has it not a sort of
sulky appearance? But very probably this style of chimney
building originated with some architect afflicted with a
quarrelsome family.

Then again, almost every modem fireplace has its separate
flue--separate throughout, from hearth to chimney-top. At least
such an arrangement is deemed desirable. Does not this look
egotistical, selfish? But still more, all these separate flues,
instead of having independent masonry establishments of their
own, or instead of being grouped together in one federal stock in
the middle of the house--instead of this, I say, each flue is
surreptitiously honey-combed into the walls; so that these last
are here and there, or indeed almost anywhere, treacherously
hollow, and, in consequence, more or less weak. Of course, the
main reason of this style of chimney building is to economize
room. In cities, where lots are sold by the inch, small space is
to spare for a chimney constructed on magnanimous principles;
and, as with most thin men, who are generally tall, so with such
houses, what is lacking in breadth, must be made up in height.