464 Cookery. 
but I have lost my notes of the particulars. Great benefit in point 
of nourishment, and improvement in the smoothness of soup, can 
be derived from linseed, and from gum arabic. 
Long continued gentle heat, whether in roasting or boiling (or' 
moderate simmering) renders meat much more tender, juicy, and 
digestible. A French peasant dines about midday : when his 
meal is over, he puts into the stew-pan with a close cover, the 
meat for his next day’s dinner ; which is exposed to a gentle heat 
for the 24 hours. A furnace that would hold a gallon of charcoal, 
and permit the stew-pan to be exposed three-fourths of its depth 
to the heat of the fire, would be an invaluable present to the poor t 
and it could be cheaply made at any iron furnace, or any pottery ? 
the common seggar is the thing itself : that is, if it had a rim below 
to hold the bars for a grate, and a rim above to support the stew- 
pan. Wood in this country is very dear in the towns, and the ex- 
travagance of the back woods is not obliterated in the cities. How 
often have I seen a quarter of a cord of wood heaped on to boil a 
teakettle ! Such a furnace might be made in a rough way with 
about five and twenty bricks, so that whatever heat was generated 
from the fuel, should be applied to the sides of the pot ; and this 
last be protected from the surrounding current of cold air. The 
inelegance, the inconvenience, the extravagance of an American 
kitchen is horrible ; from the poorest up to the most affluent. 
For cookery, whether for the poor or the rich, charcoal at eight 
dollars the hundred bushels, is cheaper than wood at four dollars a 
cord. It is more convenient, it is cleaner, it affords the means of 
expedition, it is more wholesome, it is less fatiguing, it is less 
hurtful to the eyes. When I come to the kitchen apparatus of a 
Well appointed house, I shall observe further on this. 
Sometimes, especially where charcoal is used, it may be a ques- 
6on between saving in point of fuel, and saving in point of foodo 
In some cases of this kind, as where the fuel must be wasted if 
not used, even broiling may be economical. Generally, however, 
it may be laid down as an axiom, that where fuel is at a moderate 
rate, stewing is the most frugal, and I believe the most whole- 
some, and Aiay be made, by far the most palatable method of dress- 
ing food. 
With respect to broiling^ or as we term it barbecueingy doubt* 
less it is equally extravagant with roasting, so far as the waste 
of food is concerned ; but where the circumstances of fuel admit 
of it, this method of cooking may occasionally be frugaL In places 
