It is not that the French dinners of Monte Carlo are necessarily so superior to American shore dinners, or that the little dinners of Paris are so infinitely to be preferred to those, say, of certain places in New Orleans, or that the coppery-tasting oysters of Havre are to be compared with those of our own Baltimore. There is no more to be said, probably, for the woodcock patés of old Montreuil, or the _rillettes_ of Tours, or the little pots of custard one gets at the foreign Montpelier, or the _vol-au-vent_, which is the pride and boast of the cities of Provence, than there is for grandmother's cookies such as have put Camden, Maine, on the map, or Lady Baltimore cakes, or the chicken pies one goes to northern New Hampshire to find in their glory, or the turkeys that, as much as the Green Mountains, make Vermont's fame. Still, there is no question but that the American palate would benefit much by being cultivated, not only in the interests of economy, but also with a view to the increase of gastronomic pleasure, for a taste attuned to many variations is as an ear sensitive to the nuances of sweet sounds or an eye trained to perceive delicate tones and tints. It is really a matter for regret that we, as a people, have not been as willing to learn from the French the art of cooking and eating as we have been to acquire from them knowledge of the art of dress. Until we widen our horizon sufficiently to do this, we have not even begun to develop all our food resources or to understand the first principles of true food economy--which is not at all synonymous with "going without." FLAVOR, HANDMAID OF VARIETY It is because he has a multitude of seasonings at his command and knows how to use them that the French cook is enabled not only to send to the table an infinite variety of dishes, but, at the same time, to practice economies that were otherwise impossible. The American buys an expensive cut of meat and, as is right in such a case, treats it as plainly and simply as possible. The Frenchman buys meat of a much lower quality, but so embellishes it that when it comes to the table it is superior, or, at least, equal to that which costs much more. It may be objected that this is no real economy, because by the time the French cook has sauced and spiced his cheap cut in order to make it palatable, the cost is as great, if not greater than it would have been had he paid more for his meat in the first place. This would be true enough according to the average American's method of procedure. But it is to be remembered that the French cook has already in his kitchen the cooking vinegars, the spices, the dried herbs, the extracts, that in very small amounts--a dash or a few leaves--are used at a time; also, that in a great number of cases, gravies and sauces are made from the by-products of the main dishes--those by-products that in the American kitchen usually go down the sink-drain or into the garbage pail.