The Mirror of Literature, Amusement, and Instruction. Volume 10, No. 290, December 29, 1827 — John Shaqi
The Mirror of Literature, Amusement, and Instruction. Volume 10, No. 290, December 29, 1827Various
History
The Mirror of Literature, Amusement, and Instruction. Volume 10, No. 290, December 29, 1827
Various
Popular literature -- Great Britain -- Periodicals
"But, ah! how fleeting thy renown!
Thus treading on the heel of Brown;
How vain thy spangled suit, thy gown
Intended for three waiters:
Ere Lansdowne's speech is at an end,
I see a board of lamps descend,
Whose orbs in bright confusion blend,
And strew the floor with splinters.
"Their smooth contents spread far and near,
And in one tide impetuous smear
Knight, Waiter, Liveryman, and Peer:
Nay, even his Royal Highness
The falling board no longer props,
Owns, with amaze, the unwelcome drops
And, premature anointment, swaps
For oozy wet his dryness.
"Fear shrieks in many a varied tone,
Pale Beauty mourns her spotted zone,
And heads and bleeding knuckles own
The glittering prostration.
Behold! thou wip'st thy crimson chin,
And all is discord, all is din;
While scalded waiters swear thee in
With many an execration.
"Yet, Lucas, smile in Fortune's spite;
Dark mornings often change to bright;
Ne'er shall this omen harm a wight
So active and so clever.
How buoyant, how elastic thou!
With a lamp halo round thy brow,
Prophetic Magog dubs thee now
A Lighter man--than ever."
_New Monthly Magazine._
* * * * *
ROYAL APPETITES.
Charles XII. was brave, noble, generous, and disinterested,--a complete
hero, in fact, and a regular fire-eater. Yet, in spite of these
qualifications and the eulogiums of his biographer, it is pretty evident
to those who impartially consider the career of this potentate, that he
was by no means of a sane mind. In short, to speak plainly, he was mad,
and deserved a strait-waistcoat as richly as any straw-crowned monarch
in Bedlam. A single instance, in _my_ opinion, fully substantiates
this. I allude to his absurd freak at Frederickshall, when, in order to
discover how long he could exist without nourishment, he abstained from
all kinds of food for more than seventy hours! Now, would any man in his
senses have done this? Would Louis XVIII., for instance, that wise and
ever-to-be-lamented monarch? Had it been the _reverse_ indeed--had
Charles, instead of practising starvation, adopted the opposite
expedient, and endeavoured to ascertain the greatest possible quantity
of meat, fruit, bread, wine, vegetables, Sec. &c. he could have
_disposed of_ in any given time--why then it might have been
something! But to _fast_ for three days! if this be not madness--!
Indeed, there is but one reason I could ever conceive for a person not
eating; and that is, when, like poor Count Ugolino and his family, he
can get _nothing to eat_!
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account