The Mirror of Literature, Amusement, and Instruction - Volume 10, No. 279, October 20, 1827 by Various
page 39 of 54 (72%)
page 39 of 54 (72%)
|
plague, and was the friend and companion of rich and poor. These
statements were met with undisguised contempt, and it was retaliated, that the practice of using tobacco either by smoke or snuff, was a nuisance to others, thus infringing the very primary principles of civil liberty--that it led to drunkenness and debauch--that snuff spoiled the complexion--stopped the nose to the perception of odours--and that as to the ladies, they would positively spurn any approach of familiar friendship from a snuff-taker. This raised the concealed anger of the snuff-takers, who had hitherto maintained a stubborn neutrality while the argument was kept to smoke. They replied both by wit and invective--they affirmed snuff to have a moral use--"Dust to dust"--would remind them of the brevity of life--that the king and ministers patronized the habit, and gave away £10,000 worth of snuff-boxes in every year--that as to the nose being blockaded, that was a happy circumstance to London residents, and enabled them to acquire the French accent more naturally--that as to the assumed yellowness of complexion complained of, it was only studious and Werter-like--and that as to the ladies refusing to be saluted by snuff-takers, that was a thing which modesty and prudence required them to sneeze at. The historian might add by way of reflection, that nothing could more clearly show the national freedom from anxious cares, when it was thought that the public took interest in the comparative merits of blackened teeth or a snuffy pocket-handkerchief.--_The Inspector._ * * * * * FASHIONABLE NOVELS. |
|