DOI Heft:
July 21, 1866
DOI Seite / Zitierlink:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.16878#0033
July 21. 1866.]
PUNCH, OR THE LONDON CHARIVARI.
25
I
DEMORALISATION
OF OUR WEST-END CORRESPONDENT, AFTER THE LATE ROTTEN-ROW CONTROVERSY.
SOMETHING BETTER THAN BEEE.
During the late battles in Bohemia, both the Prussian and Austrian
cavalry sustained severe losses. This circumstance may account for
the fact that a grand banquet in honour of the introduction of horse-
flesh as an article of food took place on Tuesday last week at
Lamandelay’s Great Room, Rue Richelieu, M. de Quatrepages,
member of the Institute, in the chair. It is possible that some of the
meat consumed on this occasion came directly from the field, trans-
ported by railway with sufficient speed to prevent the influence which
would otherwise be exerted upon it by hot weather; for though it
is fine to ride the high horse, it is not well to eat him. Or the
hippophagists may have thought the carnage in Germany offered a
seasonable opportunity for a demonstration to show that of the quantity
of flesh left upon a battle-field all need not be wasted; so such of it
as, in warm countries, is left to be devoured by vultures, being, in
temperate climates, available for the food of man. According to the
Paris correspondent of the Times:—•
“ 182 guests sat down to table, and all, without exception, declared that the
dinner, of which the principal dishes were formed of various parts of the horse, was
excellent. The soup, made from bouillon de cheval, the saucisson de cheva l, horse-
flesh d la mode, and lastly, the filet rdti, were all eaten with great gusto, and pro-
nounced most palateable.”
Only one species of soup is named in the foregoing outline of a bill
of fare of which the elements were derived from the noble animal.
There exists, doubtless, another. The hippophagists must needs have
a horse-tail soup that corresponds to oxtail; and perhaps they have
also a mare’s-tan soup and a colt’s-tail soup; the latter analogous to
“ Chesterfield.”
As to the saucisson de cheval? that probably is no novelty: many who,
when they think they are tasting it for the first time, having in fact
eaten it very often before under the simple name of saucisson. So
likewise horseflesh a la mode may often be an old acquaintance with a
new name, formerly familiar under that of d la mode beef. The filet rdti,
however, running with gravy, may be new to those who have been
accustomed to see fillies run only as they run for the Oaki.
By the account above quoted, the banquet which it reports was the
manifestation of a “movement,” with a regularly organised committee,
to promote the use of horseflesh as an article of food. Its sale, in that
character, is now authorised in Paris : and doubtless horse-restaurants
will soon be established there. If we also take to horse, and horse eating-
houses are established in London, a slight change will probably be
made in the appellation whereby they are denominated in the vulgar
tongue; and instead of being termed cagmag-shops they will be called
cag^ags.
In continuation of the preceding extract, we are told that :—
“ A number of the ordinary meats produced at a choice dinner were also served
up, but the company found the horseflesh so savoury and agreeable that they
remained faithful to it.”
Also that:—
“ M. de la BiiDOLLifcRE sang two new songs composed for the occasion: one
‘ Cestle Cheval qu'est le Bceuf,’ and the other ‘ Enfants, n’y touchez pas,’ The couplets,
which were extremaiy witty and appropriate, obtained a merited success.”
All this looks rather suspicious. Horse may be good enough, but
if it were really more “ savoury ” and “ agreeable ” than “ the ordinary
meats produced at a choice dinner,” its superiority to butcher’s
meat, as contradistinguished from knacker’s meat, would have been
discovered long ago. A decided predilection for horse looks like
idiosyncrasy — to use a mild if a long word; and enthusiasm
may be inferred from such a song as “ (Test le Cheval qu'est le
Bceuf.” We have outgrown old English prejudices, and no longer
regard as a typical Frenchman the one who, whilst he condemned our
cookery eulogised our meat—delivered, as lie said, at the door on the
end of a skewer. Nor do we any longer suppose that the generality of
the Erench habitually eat frogs. The Societe Hippophagique perhaps
may, going the whole horse, eat frog and all; but must find it a tough
morsel. These epicures are evidently exceptional Frenchmen.
Among the toasts with which the hippophagists in the Rue Richelieu,
washed down their horse was one proposed by M. Sibire in the name
of the Society for Protecting Animals. Of course an animal enjoys
the temporary protection which preserves it to be ultimately eaten.
The horse protected for the table is, in the meanwhile, happy in
exemption from ill-usage, and also in the speedy extinction of life,
wherein he is spared from the death of lingering misery which awaita
the uneatable English pauper.
PUNCH, OR THE LONDON CHARIVARI.
25
I
DEMORALISATION
OF OUR WEST-END CORRESPONDENT, AFTER THE LATE ROTTEN-ROW CONTROVERSY.
SOMETHING BETTER THAN BEEE.
During the late battles in Bohemia, both the Prussian and Austrian
cavalry sustained severe losses. This circumstance may account for
the fact that a grand banquet in honour of the introduction of horse-
flesh as an article of food took place on Tuesday last week at
Lamandelay’s Great Room, Rue Richelieu, M. de Quatrepages,
member of the Institute, in the chair. It is possible that some of the
meat consumed on this occasion came directly from the field, trans-
ported by railway with sufficient speed to prevent the influence which
would otherwise be exerted upon it by hot weather; for though it
is fine to ride the high horse, it is not well to eat him. Or the
hippophagists may have thought the carnage in Germany offered a
seasonable opportunity for a demonstration to show that of the quantity
of flesh left upon a battle-field all need not be wasted; so such of it
as, in warm countries, is left to be devoured by vultures, being, in
temperate climates, available for the food of man. According to the
Paris correspondent of the Times:—•
“ 182 guests sat down to table, and all, without exception, declared that the
dinner, of which the principal dishes were formed of various parts of the horse, was
excellent. The soup, made from bouillon de cheval, the saucisson de cheva l, horse-
flesh d la mode, and lastly, the filet rdti, were all eaten with great gusto, and pro-
nounced most palateable.”
Only one species of soup is named in the foregoing outline of a bill
of fare of which the elements were derived from the noble animal.
There exists, doubtless, another. The hippophagists must needs have
a horse-tail soup that corresponds to oxtail; and perhaps they have
also a mare’s-tan soup and a colt’s-tail soup; the latter analogous to
“ Chesterfield.”
As to the saucisson de cheval? that probably is no novelty: many who,
when they think they are tasting it for the first time, having in fact
eaten it very often before under the simple name of saucisson. So
likewise horseflesh a la mode may often be an old acquaintance with a
new name, formerly familiar under that of d la mode beef. The filet rdti,
however, running with gravy, may be new to those who have been
accustomed to see fillies run only as they run for the Oaki.
By the account above quoted, the banquet which it reports was the
manifestation of a “movement,” with a regularly organised committee,
to promote the use of horseflesh as an article of food. Its sale, in that
character, is now authorised in Paris : and doubtless horse-restaurants
will soon be established there. If we also take to horse, and horse eating-
houses are established in London, a slight change will probably be
made in the appellation whereby they are denominated in the vulgar
tongue; and instead of being termed cagmag-shops they will be called
cag^ags.
In continuation of the preceding extract, we are told that :—
“ A number of the ordinary meats produced at a choice dinner were also served
up, but the company found the horseflesh so savoury and agreeable that they
remained faithful to it.”
Also that:—
“ M. de la BiiDOLLifcRE sang two new songs composed for the occasion: one
‘ Cestle Cheval qu'est le Bceuf,’ and the other ‘ Enfants, n’y touchez pas,’ The couplets,
which were extremaiy witty and appropriate, obtained a merited success.”
All this looks rather suspicious. Horse may be good enough, but
if it were really more “ savoury ” and “ agreeable ” than “ the ordinary
meats produced at a choice dinner,” its superiority to butcher’s
meat, as contradistinguished from knacker’s meat, would have been
discovered long ago. A decided predilection for horse looks like
idiosyncrasy — to use a mild if a long word; and enthusiasm
may be inferred from such a song as “ (Test le Cheval qu'est le
Bceuf.” We have outgrown old English prejudices, and no longer
regard as a typical Frenchman the one who, whilst he condemned our
cookery eulogised our meat—delivered, as lie said, at the door on the
end of a skewer. Nor do we any longer suppose that the generality of
the Erench habitually eat frogs. The Societe Hippophagique perhaps
may, going the whole horse, eat frog and all; but must find it a tough
morsel. These epicures are evidently exceptional Frenchmen.
Among the toasts with which the hippophagists in the Rue Richelieu,
washed down their horse was one proposed by M. Sibire in the name
of the Society for Protecting Animals. Of course an animal enjoys
the temporary protection which preserves it to be ultimately eaten.
The horse protected for the table is, in the meanwhile, happy in
exemption from ill-usage, and also in the speedy extinction of life,
wherein he is spared from the death of lingering misery which awaita
the uneatable English pauper.