The Head of Man is like a Pudding: And whence have all Rhimes, Poems, Plots and Inventions sprang, but from that same Pudding. What is Poetry, but a Pudding of Words. The Physicians, tho' they cry out so much against Cooks and Cookery, yet are but Cooks themselves; with this difference only, the Cooks Pudding lengthens Life, the Physicians shortens it. So that we Live and Die by Pudding. For what is a Clyster, but a Bag-Pudding; a Pill, but a Dumpling; or a Bolus, but a Tansy, tho' not altogether so Toothsome. In a word; Physick is only a Puddingizing or Cookery of Drugs. The Law is but a Cookery of Quibbles and Contentions. [a] * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * is but a Pudding of * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *. Some swallow every thing whole and unmix'd; so that it may rather be call'd a Heap, than a Pudding. Others are so Squeamish, the greatest Mastership in Cookery is requir'd to make the Pudding Palatable: The Suet which others gape and swallow by Gobs, must for these puny Stomachs be minced to Atoms; the Plums must be pick'd with the utmost Care, and every Ingredient proportion'd to the greatest Nicety, or it will never go down. [Footnote a: _The Cat run away with this part of the Copy, on which the Author had unfortunately laid some of Mother _Crump_'s Sausages._] The Universe it self is but a Pudding of Elements. Empires, Kingdoms, States and Republicks are but Puddings of People differently made up. The Celestial and Terrestrial Orbs are decypher'd to us by a pair of Globes or Mathematical Puddings. The Success of War and Fate of Monarchies are entirely dependant on Puddings and Dumplings: For what else are Cannon-Balls, but Military Puddings; or Bullets, but Dumplings; only with this difference, they do not sit so well on the Stomach as a good Marrow-Pudding or Bread-Pudding. In short, There is nothing valuable in Nature, but what, more or less, has an Allusion to Pudding or Dumpling. Why then should they be held in Disesteem? Why should Dumpling-Eating be ridicul'd, or Dumpling-Eaters derided? Is it not Pleasant and Profitable? Is it not Ancient and Honourable? Kings, Princes, and Potentates have in all Ages been Lovers of Pudding. Is it not therefore of Royal Authority? Popes, Cardinals, Bishops, Priests and Deacons have, Time out of Mind, been great Pudding-Eaters: Is it not therefore a Holy and Religious Institution? Philosophers, Poets, and Learned Men in all Faculties, Judges, Privy-Councellors, and Members of both Houses, have, by their great Regard to Pudding, given a Sanction to it that nothing can efface. Is it not therefore Ancient, Honourable, and Commendable? _Quare itaque fremuerunt Auctores?_