Now, which is the worse—to have no appetite Sor your dinner, or to have no dinner for your appetite here are lots of people on the one side or the other of this question, When good digestion waits on appetite and health on both," that is the ideal attitude of a person towards his meals. But most of us are not blessed in that: way; we either have too much food without an appetite, or a vigorous ap-Rote will answer this question differently, yet tite without enough to satisfy it. Different the common sense of it is that, within reasonable limits, it is better to have an appetite without a dinner, because, short of the starvation line, a hungry man is a healthy man whereas a man who ought to eat and doesn't feel like eating, stands in need of "alterations and repair To illustrate, We recently received a com: munication in which the writer eave, "I was afraid to cat." Did he fancy his food was poisoned, or did his nature rebel against the nourishment lived on? If the latter, why Let him clear the mystery himself.
work from' railway porter to signalman He says, In the year 1889 I changed my had been signalman twelve months, and then all at once, so to speak, I did not feel myself. My mouth tasted bad, so that ordinary articles of diet seemed to lose their flavour; the palate, nothing to aay to them. "One thing was like to put: it in that way, appeared to have another, and none'was good, My fongue'was
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.