Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1885-09-12
A POINTED CRITICISM In FAVOR
OF WOMEN.
Prentice milford and His Article
on Culinary Art Reviewed and
the Glove Thrown Down.
Correspondence of the RncoRD-Us1oS.i

TO pGDnc ana employers, after thorough
trial on cars, hotels, steamers and other
places, where the public simple-Simon to
the pie-man says, Let me taste your
ware" The reasons of mems success he
gives as these: First, that men are, by rea-
son of superior physical strength. best
fitted for arduous labor over a hot cook
stove, and to mental strain of deciding
what to cook and how to cook it that they
are always on time with meals, manage
their work in very limited space, and do
not worry or get . nervous"
Contrasting his sex with women cooks
the writer does not say that women have
ever been tried and found wanting as cooks
in public places, but simply that they
would fail if they were tried, because they
cannot cook IN private as well as men do
in public that women use an entire house
for their work, and could not cramp them
selves into spaces allotted to men cooks :.
that women never get even with their
work, and in hundreds of years they have
made few improvements calculated to IA
cilitate the accomplishing of greater results
with less labor. In fact
THAT WOMEN CAN'T COOK AT ALL.
Whether it is a collision or not Mr.. Null
ford's observations confirm the impression
intended to convey, that he is an old bach
elor. a real simon-pure old maid is per-
haps as well fitted to talk on men cooks as
an alleged bachelor on womens work.
lift please thee, good MILFORD
An here's my hand, fore friendly strife"
You admit superior strength for your
sex and discuss them as cooks only, while
you speak of women in their general work.
Kindly fix your mind on that very point.
Men cooks attend to but one branch of
business, and can concentrate their powers
on that line for which they are engaged.
Having no other work, they do not require
I" a whole house" especially when the
kitchen heating apparatus and every uten-
sill are sbillfully arranged for mans con-
veDience and expedition, as is seldom done
for women.
The difference of space is not the greatest
item, for comparison, connected with the
two at work. In addition to furnishing
and cleaning the whole house" the care
of all its occupants is thrust upon the
woman in private life. She not only cooks
but nurses, makes, mends, washes and
irons their clothing; look after the asso-
GATES OF her children, sometimes of her
husband; sees to their education, what
books they read has the added work of
entertaining visitors; does more or less
work in connection with churches or be-
neyolent societies; to say nothing of hun
dred unnamed daily duties incidental to
domestic life and from which no good wife
or mother can escape, or wishes to escape.
Yet, notwithstanding all these calls drain
ing her sympathies, you complain that
woman does not " get even with her work"
compared with a man who has none of
those calls and superior strength to cope
with his one duty.
fs0hpre i sraT,n tbefic ~, al oo,,-=-+,.,-..
Go seekit we'll" ~
1t is more difficult to cook for six than
sixty people. In an average-sized family
they are, presumably, of varying ages.
tastes, health conditions, and must have
foods not only cooked, but chosen with
care, adapted to their needs. Among sixty
persons individual preferences are lost
sight of. Nobody expects to get what
would best please or agree with him, but
takes chances if
" Indigestion, that conscience of every bad
stomach,
Shall relentlessly gnaw and pursue him
With some ache or some pain"
We women are glad that men have mas
tered cooking, because they who really
know anything about its laborious require
ments are the ones from whom we expect
appreciation. In any art it is only those
IEAlOIdul % IT'S IGCG1sGIy ttdAlI1llE WHO arc
most ready to sit in adverse judgment upon
The achievements of its yotaries. Because
men succeed as cooks, we are not so ungen-
erous as to decry their work in side issues,
but hope they may get even" with all
their work.
ANOTHER VIEW OF THE CASE.
There are further differences for consid-
Grafton. Who employ men? Corporations
or patrons that afford unlimited supplies
The trouble of frequent purchases is obvi-
ated by steward, who furnishes large
quantity as well as great variety to devise
from. All the man cook has to do to get
anything he wants is to draw on the stew
ard, or, in that worthy's absence, order
from the respective tradesmen. 1t is not
necessary for the man cook to save here,
and scrimp there, so that he may buy new
shoes for the railroad President, paw a doc
tors bill for the steamer company's wife,
OF take the hotels children to the fair. He
assumes no economical burdens The
grocers bill never comes within his
ken, for he uses all the butter he
wants, whether it is cheap or dear.
He need not save on eggs or sugar.
His canned fruits and vegetables cost
him not one hours labor. He has a dish
washer who does all the drudgery and
leaves him time for complete arrange
ments. His salary is in sight and corpora
tons take the profits. This is not TO insin-
uate that men are wasteful, but it is to say
that they are not pursued by constant
plans to economic as are thousands of
women everywhere, who are not even ex-
pectant OF appreciation as reward, much
less of stated sum to look for. If corpor-
atoms issued orders to cut down on this or
that, or growled when the butchers bill
],
jobs with q speed that would oftentimes
benefit women TO pattern after. Toward
those dependent on her loving heart for
health and happiness resulting from the
mental and physical food that she supplies,
think you woman feels no moral respon-
sibility. Full well she realizes,
oh, better no doubt is dinner of herbs
When seasoned by love which no rancor dis
turbS
And sweetened by all that is sweetest in life,
Than turbot, bisque, ortolan, eaten in strife"
If a man cook imagines himself master
of his art, think you he cares a sand pie
who likes his cooking? Why not? Be
cause on steamers and cars, where you
speak of him as most successful, he deals
entirely with floating population. Who
is here to-day is gone tomorrow. 1t is
nothing to him what they prefer, what
agrees with them, OF what they want to
pay. He has not fixed the price He con-
suits nobody about the bill of fare, but
cooks according to the seasons staples for
fifty or hundred, as required. When the
season changes he will slightly change the
bill, always sure of plenty to draw from.
If to-day's crowd don't like it, to-morrow's
will-or not, it's all the same to him. IF
there are regular boarders, they can take
what is put before them, and no words
about it, or change their boarding-ho
Who ever heard of boarders grumbling OF
suggesting to a man cook2 He is master
of the situation. knows it, and laughs to
scorn personal or public palate.
PICKS UP THE GLOVE.
Take the best man cook anybody ever
saw, put him in a family of eight to look
after their culinary and other wants; let
some one grudgingly give him scant
amount of money to supply abundant
l. L Al -