Factors such as these must not be omitted in examining the sociological recuperation of a smitten city. And when the experience of Halifax is set side by side with the related experiences of other cities a conclusion may be drawn that disaster-stricken communities can always count upon public aid, for the reasons which have already been discussed. But there is found to be strongly suggested a correlation between the striking character or magnitude of a disaster and the generosity of the relief response,[148] as there is also with the immediacy of the appeal. "It is not the facts themselves which strike the popular imagination" says Le Bon, "but the way in which they take place."[149] There have been disasters relatively serious, such as the St. Quentin forest fire, where repeated appeals met with astonishingly little response from the people. "A single great accident" continues Le Bon, "will profoundly impress them even though the results be infinitely less disastrous than those of a hundred small accidents put together." It was in recognition of this principle that "it was decided to transfer the residue of the amount contributed [after the Triangle fire] to the contingent fund of the American Red Cross, to be used in disasters, which in their nature do not evoke so quick or generous public response, but where the suffering is as grievous."[150] [148] At the time of the tragic Martinique disaster the New York committee received $80,000 more than it could disburse. (Devine, Edward T., _The Principles of Relief_, N. Y., 1904, pt. iv, ch. vii, p. 468.) [149] Le Bon, Gustave, _The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind_ (London), ch. iii, p. 79. [150] Deacon, J. Byron, _Disasters_ (N. Y., 1918), ch. v, p. 120. Besides the relation of the tragic in catastrophe to generosity and other expressions of sympathy, the experience at Halifax suggests also a relationship between the aid furnished by a contributing community and that community's own previous history in regard to calamity. As an instance may be cited the quick and splendid response which came from St. John and Campbellton, two New Brunswick cities with unforgettable memories of great disasters which they themselves had suffered. It is also not improbable that the study of comparative catastrophe would reveal a correlation between the relative amount of aid given and the distance of those who give. Indeed there are reasons which suggest that the relationship might be written thus: that relief in disaster varies inversely as the square of the cost distance. The association here suggested is given additional plausibility from the fact that attention to certain types of news seems to vary according to this principle, and news notice is no inconsiderable factor in disaster aid.