Cranberry sauce is in America associated inseparably with turkey, and
the turkey is another of our gastronomic specialties.
Benjamin Franklin argued that the turkey--which is surely a finer bird
than the eagle, less vicious, and infinitely more useful--should have
been adopted as the emblem of the United States, for it is a truly
indigenous and national bird. In Franklin's day "the log cabin of the
pioneer was surrounded by these birds, saluting each other in the early
morning from the treetops."
Those were gala times for hunters and epicures, when wild turkeys used
to fly in flocks of hundreds!
They owe their name to the notion, once current, that they came to
Europe from Asia. But it is now established beyond doubt that they
are aboriginal Americans. It did not take the Spaniards long to find
out their value, for, little more than a quarter of a century after
Columbus discovered this Continent, they took some of the birds across
the sea to their own country and thence the turkey soon made its way
to other parts of Europe. Records show that in England, in 1541, the
turkey was enumerated among the dainties, while in 1573 it had become
the customary fare of the farmer.
"The turkey is beyond doubt one of the finest presents the New
World has made the Old," wrote the best-known of French epicures,
Brillat-Savarin; and in his "Physiologie du Gout" he has a chapter in
which he proudly relates how he shot one of these birds. It was in
1794; he was visiting a friend at Hartford, Connecticut, who took him
out hunting one day, after having treated him on the previous evening
to a dinner one course of which consisted of the entirely American
corned beef, which the eminent epicure found "splendid."
They shot some fat tender partridges and seven gray squirrels, "which
are highly esteemed in this country"; then he had his chance at the
turkey, bagged it, took it back to Hartford and had it cooked for
some guests who kept exclaiming: "Very good! Exceedingly good! Oh, dear
sir, what a glorious bit."
[Illustration: BRILLAT-SAVARIN]
Though he had a high opinion of his own judgment in matters
gastronomic, Brillat-Savarin was much pleased when a friend of his, M.
Bose, who lived in Carolina, contributed to the "Annales d'Agriculture"
of Feb. 28, 1821, an article which confirmed his own judgment as
to the superiority of the American turkey to the bird as reared in
France, attributing this superiority to the fact that the American
turkey roamed the woods freely and thus gained a finer Flavor than the
domesticated bird has.
Unfortunately, it took American poultry raisers several generations to
realize the full significance of this fact. All was well so long as
there were plenty of wild turkeys, the flesh of which was of perfect
savor, especially during the autumn, when they lived largely on pecan
nuts. All was well, too, so long as the farms were few and scattered,
and there was interbreeding of wild and domesticated birds. But the
time came when the turkeys degenerated, owing to excessive inbreeding
and too close confinement. It is only within a few years that farmers
have begun to heed the advice that "it is better to send a thousand
miles for a new male than to risk the chances of inbreeding," and to
restore to the turkey his forest freedom.
"While our present-day turkeys are classed as 'domestic fowls, they
are rather semi-domestic when compared with other poultry," writes T.
F. McGrew.[22]
It is this semi-game quality of the best turkeys that make them so dear
to the epicure. Brillat-Savarin's verdict is that the turkey, "though
not the most tender, is the most tasty of all the farm fowls,"--and few
will disagree with him.
For the benefit of the rapidly growing number of farmers who increase
their income by raising turkeys, I will cite the words of an expert
which sum up the philosophy of the subject:
The flavor of all turkeys raised by careful farmers within
five or six years is much finer than in the run down stock
raised by old fogy farmers. The improvement in flavor has
also been accompanied by an increase in size and tenderness.
This is due to the admixture of the strain from wild turkeys
from Canada and the South and the Southwest and to the modern
system of keeping the birds out of doors as much as possible
and giving them opportunities for getting plenty of mast and
the seeds of wild and cultivated plants and pure water from
brooks and streams kept clear from noxious plants and sewage.
Birds thus reared bring fancy prices--a point to which I shall recur in
the next chapter under "Feeding Flavor Into Food."
It has been customary for a long time for patriotic persons to send to
the President of the United States choice turkeys for the Thanksgiving
and Christmas dinners. Woodrow Wilson received one in December, 1912,
from Kentucky which weighed forty-three pounds and had been nurtured
"as befits a King Gobbler," on sweet chestnuts, with celery and pepper
to improve its Flavor.
The Guinea fowl is another bird which must roam wild to do well, and
which consequently has a gamy Flavor, like the semi-domestic turkey.
Though not an aboriginal American, it has become acclimated. It is an
African cousin of the turkey.
In his useful treatise on "The Guinea Fowl and Its Use as Food"
(Farmers' Bulletin No. 234), Dr. Langworthy states that in Jamaica and
some other regions the Guinea birds "have gone back to their wild state
and are hunted in their season as game birds. They are also well known
as game birds in England, where large flocks are sometimes kept in game
preserves."
On the continent they are more domesticated and are raised in large
numbers for the markets of France, Austria, and Germany. What we want
in our markets, however, is not the domesticated Guinea fowl so much as
the half-wild. We have plenty of other good barnyard birds, including
the savory squab, but we are woefully short of game, and the Guinea
fowl, more than the turkey, comes to the rescue. While the mature bird
has its own gamy Flavor, the chicks resemble young quail, and the
eggs are a good deal like the highly valued plover eggs. Even the
domesticated birds retain a surprising number of their wild traits and
on this bird, therefore, we may have to depend largely for our game of
the future.
To the deplorable condition of our present game market I referred
briefly in the chapter on Germany, where they do things so much better.
In New York, quail (so abundant until a few years ago) are now imported
from far-away Egypt, and grouse from Scotland, while prices have gone
up like rockets.
In Louisiana alone it was computed that over 4,265,000 game birds were
killed in the season 1909-1910. Mrs. Russell Sage's generous gift of
$150,000 secured Marsh Island as a refuge for the wild fowl. Others
have helped the cause, and the Government's efforts are thus summed up
in Circular No. 87 of the Bureau of Biological Survey:
For purposes of administration the bird reservations are
grouped in six districts: (1) The Gulf district, including
10 reservations in Florida, 4 in Louisiana, and 1 in Porto
Rico; (2) the Lake district, including 2 in Michigan, 2 in
North Dakota, and 1 in Wisconsin; (3) the Mountain district,
including 12 in the Rocky Mountain States, South Dakota, and
Nebraska; (4) the Pacific district, including 3 in California,
4 in Oregon, and 8 in Washington; (5) the Alaska district,
including 8 reservations; and (6) the Hawaiian district,
including 1 reservation. Wardens are stationed on the more
important reservations and the National Association of Audubon
Societies ... coöperates actively with the Department of
Agriculture in protecting the birds.
There is a special periodical, the "Gamebreeders' Magazine," devoted to
the task of replenishing our stock of wild animals, which was for so
many generations one of the chief assets of Gastronomic America. There
are also Breeders' Associations which are planning to make American
game, feathered and unfeathered, abundant once more. No one can ever
bring back the large flocks of wild turkeys, the pigeons that darkened
the skies, the herds of countless buffaloes; but we can at least bring
back in part our former abundance of some kinds of game by following
European methods.
The Government is also ready to help by supplying, without charge,
birds to be liberated and allowed to multiply in various places. Our
native birds are, of course, best adapted for this purpose, but what
can be done with imported birds is shown in Farmers' Bulletin No. 390,
in which Henry Oldys of the Biological Survey tells the interesting
story of how the Chinese and English pheasants have been made to feel
at home in Oregon and in other States, where they have become permanent
additions to the game list.
"Deer Farming in the United States" is another valuable Farmers'
Bulletin (No. 330), by D. E. Lantz. Its object is thus summed up:
As a result of the growing scarcity of game animals in this
country the supply of venison is wholly inadequate to the
demand, and the time seems opportune for developing the
industry of deer farming, which may be made profitable alike
to the State and the individuals engaged therein. The raising
of venison for market is as legitimate a business as the
growing of beef and mutton, and State laws, when prohibitory,
as many of them are, should be so modified as to encourage
the industry. Furthermore, deer and elk may be raised to
advantage in forests and on rough, brushy ground unfitted for
either agriculture or stock raising, thus utilizing for profit
much land that is now waste. An added advantage is that the
business is well adapted to landowners of small means.
Mr. Lantz is convinced that, with favorable legislation, "this
excellent and nutritious meat, instead of being denied to 99 per cent.
of the population of the country, may become as common and as cheap in
our markets as mutton."