300 



NEW ENGLAND FARMER. 



July 



For the New England Farmer. 

 COLOR OP CATTLE, 



We speak of the animals of one section of 

 country as red, another as black — of one class as 

 a mixture of red and white, another as fawn-col- 

 ored, &c., &c., as though these characteristics 

 were of a reliable character. Is it so ? Can we 

 predict at all from the color of the parents, what 

 will be the color of the ofl'spring, or is it chance 

 entirely ? We speak of the red cattle of New 

 England — is this characteristic permanent? I 

 make the inquiry to be informed, not having had 

 sufficient experience to speak with confidence on 

 the point. So much is said of color, in the des- 

 cription of animals, that it is well to understand 

 how far this is to be relied on. Whenever we 

 see an ox with a white head, the thought imme- 

 diately occurs, has not that animal a streak of 

 Hereford blood, — just as though this color was 

 peculiar to this class. In speaking of the ani- 

 mals in some of the districts of Great Britain, 

 they are said to be all black, or nearly so. So 

 much so, that horned cattle generally are spoken 

 of as black cattle. With us, it is very rare to 

 meet an animal entirely black. 



April 8, 1858. INQUIRER. 



For the Neic England Farmer. 

 THOUGHTS ON COOKERY. 



Your remarks, Mr. Editor, in reply to my in- 

 quiry about cooks, viz., that medicines are so 

 mingled with all sorts of food, or nearly all sorts, 

 now-a-days, that it is difficult to get anything 

 that is unpolluted by them, and that there is 

 scarcely anything that needs reformation more 

 than our present modes of cookery, have embold- 

 ened me to say a few things in your paper, on 

 which, otherwise, I might not have had the mor- 

 al courage to venture. Yet I know, dear sir, 

 that there are a few of your readers so tired of 

 wearing the chains of a slavery more detestable, if 

 possible, than that of man to man, that the discus- 

 sion of this subject in a candid way, so as not to 

 offend those who may not perceive its necessity, 

 will be truly welcome. But I have no room for 

 preliminaries, other than to bespeak forgiveness 

 if I chance to repeat some things which I may 

 have already said in other numbers of your valu- 

 able paper. 



There are a few simple principles by which 

 every truly Christian cook who wishes to be free 

 — sent of God, and not of Satan — should be gov- 

 erned. Let me, in as few words as I can, present 

 some of them for consideration. Others, of less 

 importance, I omit. 



1. No cookery is legitimate whose aim is to 

 make it less healthy, less agreeable, or less nutri- 

 tious than before. 



2. No cookery is according to truth and nature, 

 and, consequently, is legitimate — which even/^er- 

 mits this. 



3. No cookery is in accordance with the laws of 

 God, natural and moral, which aims solely to bring 

 the food to appetites which are acknowledged, 

 universally, to he fallen appetites. The food be- 

 ing made right, our appetites should come to the 

 food, and not the food to our perverted appetites. 

 Hence, v.e should hear nothing about preparing 



food so as to have it relish. We should prepare 

 it right, and habit will soon render it agreeable. 



4. No food can be according to law — the law of 

 God, I mean, not the law of custom — which is so 

 operated on by cookery that its proportions are 

 much changed from what the Creator intended. 

 Thus the apple contains water, acid, and saccha- 

 rine matter. Now to have it lawfully cooked, all 

 these should be retained in their own propor- 

 tions. To diminish or add to the water ; or above 

 all, to increase or diminish the acid with sugar 

 by cookery, would therefore be a wrong. Nor 

 have we a right to add to them any new ingredi- 

 ents, foreign or domestic ; such as sugar, salt, 

 pepper, spices, &c. I do not say, in this place, 

 that they may not be eaten, but I do say that 

 they should not be added to our food. They 

 should be eaten by themselves, if at all. 



5. That sort of preparation of our food which 

 putrefies it, or even carries it through the first 

 stage of putrefaction — whether we call it cookery 

 or not — is far enough from b^ing legitimate. 

 Thus that which is prepared by fermentation, 

 whether bread, cake, beer, or anything else, has 

 passed through what may be called the first stage 

 of putrefaction, and is hence a detei-iorated article. 

 In like manner, processes of cookery which has- 

 ten decomposition by diminishing the vitality, so 

 to speak, of the article, are, to say the least, 

 doubtful. 



6. No processes of cookery are legitimate 

 which have for their object to preserve food from 

 decomposition, especially such as accomplish this 

 object by depriving the article of its vitality by 

 extrt>. heat or by the addition of foreign agents, 

 or medicinal substances. Thus the preservation 

 of butter and meats by salt, spices, saleratus, 

 saltpetre, and the preservation of cheese by ren- 

 net, salt, &c., is not in accordance with the laws 

 of nature, and is, therefore, wrong. Drying sub- 

 stances very slowly by the fire or in the open air, 

 is less objectionable. 



7. All cookery which consists in part or in 

 whole in adding to our food, while being cooked 

 or afterward, any medicinal agents, even though 

 not intended to preserve it from decay, is also 

 wrong. Thus the addition of saleratus, saltpetre 

 (or nitre,) cream of tartar, vinegar, mustard, 

 catchup, pepper, allspice, ginger, cinnamon, salt, 

 &c., is, by this rule, objectionable. For all these 

 things and many more, whis^' I could name are 

 medicines. They are set down in our books as 

 medicines — they ever were medicines — they pro- 

 bably ever will be so. The last three are least 

 objectionable. 



8. Lastly — for the present — Dr. Dunglison, in 

 his "Elements of Hygiene," says, "that every 

 made dish is more or less rebellious ;" by which 

 he must mean more or less objectionable. As an 

 example of his meaning, he speaks, in particular, 

 of the addition of eggs, as wrong. If eggs are 

 wrong, butter is more so, milk also, and sugar ; 

 for all compounds into which these enter are 

 made dishes. The French are said to have 685 

 preparations of which eggs form a component 

 part, and we have probably hundreds. So of but- 

 ter and lard ; nearly everything, now-a-days, is 

 besmeared or permeated by one or th©> other of 

 them. 



It is possible a few madedishes,if they deserve 

 the name, such as farina mixed with farina, ia 



