I eat flesh moderately, and never drink much wine." They both seemed
to overlook the crucial problem as to whether or not animal food

contains hurtful poison. If it does, it should not be eaten at all.
We never hear of sensible people takingarsenic, strychnine,

or other poisons, in moderation, but many foolish women, I believe,
take arsenic to pale their complexions, while others, both men and women,

take strychnine in combination with other drugs, as a tonic,
but will anyone argue that these substances are foods?

The rule of moderation is applicable to things which are nutritious,
or at least harmless, but not to noxious foods, however small

the quantity of poison they may contain.
--

* I have never been a smoker and have always eschewed tobacco,
cigarettes, etc.; though for a short while to oblige friends

I occasionally" target="_blank" title="ad.偶然地；非经常地">occasionally accepted a cigarette, now I firmly refuse
everything of the sort.

--
Pleasant conversation at the dinner table is always enjoyable,

and a good talker is always welcome, but I often wonder why Americans,
who generally are so quick to improve opportunity,

and are noted for their freedom from traditional conventionalisms,
do not make a more systematic use of the general love of good conversation.

Anyone who is a witty conversationalist, with a large fund of anecdote,
is sure to be asked by every dinner host to help to entertain the guests,

but if the company be large the favorite can be enjoyed by only a few,
and those who are too far away to hear, or who are just near enough

to hear a part but not all, are likely to feel aggrieved.
They cannot hear what is amusing the rest, while the talk elsewhere

prevents their talking as they would if there were no interruptions.
A raconteur generally monopolizes half the company,

and leaves the other half out in the cold. This might be avoided
if talkers were engaged to entertain the whole company during dinner,

as pianists are now sometimes engaged to play to them after dinner.
Or, the entertainment might be varied by engaging a good professional reciter

to reproduceliterary gems, comic or otherwise. I am sure the result
would bring more general satisfaction to the guests

than the present method of leaving them to entertain themselves.
Chinese employ singing girls; Japanese, geishas to talk, sing or dance.

The ideal would here again seem to be an amalgamation of East and West.
It is difficult for a mixed crowd to be always agreeable,

even in the genial" target="_blank" title="a.意气相投的；合适的">congenialatmosphere of a good feast, unless the guests
have been selected with a view to their opinions rather than

to their social standing. Place a number of people whose ideas are common,
with a difference, around a well-spread table and there will be no lack

of good, earnest, instructive conversation. Most men and women
can talk well if they have the right sort of listeners.

If the hearer is unsympathetic the best talker becomes dumb.
Hosts who remember this will always be appreciated.

As a rule, a dinner conversation is seldom worth remembering,
which is a pity. Man, the most sensible of all animals, can talk nonsense

better than all the rest of his tribe. Perhaps the flow of words
may be as steady as the eastward flow of the Yang-tse-Kiang in my own country,

but the memory only retains a recollection of a vague, undefined -- what?
The conversation like the flavors provided by the cooks has been evanescent.

Why should not hostesses make as much effort to stimulate
the minds of their guests as they do to gratify their palates?

What a boon it would be to many a bashful man, sitting next to a lady
with whom he has nothing in common, if some public entertainer

during the dinner relieved him from the necessity of always thinking
of what he should say next? How much more he could enjoy

the tasty dishes his hostess had provided; and as for the lady --
what a number of suppressed yawns she might have avoided.

To take great pains and spend large sums to provide nice food
for people who cannot enjoy it because they have to talk to one another,

seems a pity. Let one man talk to the rest and leave them leisure to eat,
is my suggestion.

The opportunities afforded at the dining table may be turned
to many useful purposes. Of course not all are ill-paired,

and many young men and ladies meet, sit side by side, engage in a friendly,
pleasant conversation, renew their acquaintance at other times,

and finally merge their separate paths in the highway of marriage.
Perhaps China might borrow a leaf from this custom and substitute

dinner parties for go-betweens. The dinner-party method, however,
has its dangers as well as its advantages -- it depends on the point of view.

Personal peculiarities and defects, if any, can be easily detected
by the way in which the conversation is carried on, and the manner in which

the food is handled. It has sometimes happened that the affianced
have cancelled their engagement after a dinner party. On the other hand,

matters of great import can often be arranged at the dinner table better
than anywhere else. Commercial transactions involving millions of dollars

have frequently been settled while the parties were sipping champagne;
even international problems, ending in elaborate negotiations and treaties,

have been first discussed with the afterdinner cigar.
The atmosphere of good friendship and equality, engendered by

a well-furnished room, good cheer, pleasant company, and a genialhostess,
disarms prejudice, removes barriers, melts reserve, and disposes one to see

that there is another side to every question.
In China when people have quarreled their friends generally

invite them to dinner, where the matters in dispute are amicably arranged.
These are called "peace dinners". I would recommend that

a similar expedient should be adopted in America; many a knotty point
could be disposed of by a friendly discussion at the dinner table.

If internationaldisputes were always arranged in this way
the representatives of nations having complaints against each other

might more often than now discover unexpected ways of adjusting
their differences. Why should such matters invariably be remanded

to formal conferences and set speeches? The preliminaries, at least,
would probably be better arranged at dinner parties and social functions.

Eating has always been associated with friendship. "To eat salt" with an Arab
forms a most binding contract. Even "the serpent" in the book of Genesis

commenced his acquaintance with Eve by suggesting a meal.
It almost seems as if there were certain unwritten laws in American society,

assigning certain functions to certain days in the week.
I do not believe Americans are superstitious, but I found that Thursday

was greatly in favor. I remember on one occasion that Mrs. Grant,
widow of the late President, sent an invitation to my wife and myself

to dine at her house some Thursday evening; this was three weeks in advance,
and we readily accepted her invitation. After our acceptance,

about a dozen invitations came for that same Thursday, all of which we had,
of course, to decline. Curiously enough we received no invitations

for any other day during that week, and just before that eventful Thursday
we received a letter from Mrs. Grant cancelling the invitation on account of

the death of one of her relations, so that we had to dine at home after all.
Now we Chinese make no such distinctions between days.

Every day of the week is equally good; in order however to avoid clashing
with other peoples' engagements, we generally fix Fridays

for our receptions or dinners, but there is not among the Chinese
an entertainment season as there is in Washington, and other great cities,

when everybody in good society is busy attending or giving
"At Homes", tea parties or dinners. I frequently attended

"At Homes" or tea parties in half-a-dozen places or more in one afternoon,
but no one can dine during the same evening in more than one place.

In this respect America might learn a lesson from China. We can accept
half-a-dozen invitations to dinner for one evening; all we have to do

is to go to each place in turn, partake of one or two dishes,
excuse ourselves to the host and then go somewhere else.

By this means we avoid the seeming rudeness of a declination,
and escape the ill feelings which are frequently created in the West

by invitations being refused. The Chinese method makes possible
the cultivation of democratic friendships without violating

aristocratic instincts, and for candidates at election times
it would prove an agreeable method by which to make new friends.

We are less rigid than Americans about dropping in and taking
a mouthful or two at dinner, even without a special invitation.*

--
* Since writing the above, I have heard from an American lady