Popular distrust of fungi
But in America the fungus is under the ban, its great majority of harmless or even wholesome edible species having been brought into popular disrepute through the contamination, mostly, of a single small genus.
In the absence of special scientific knowledge, or, from our present point of view, its equivalent, popular familiarity, this general distrust of the whole fungus tribe may be, however, considered a beneficent prejudice. So deadly is the insidious, mysterious foe that lurks among the friendly species that it is well for humanity in general that the entire list of fungi should share its odium, else those "toadstool" fatalities, already alarmingly frequent, might become a serious feature in our tables of mortality.
Fungus food for all
But the prejudice is needlessly sweeping. A little so-called knowledge of fungi has often proven to be a "dangerous thing," it is true, but it is quite possible for any one of ordinary intelligence, rightly instructed, to master the discrimination of at least afewof the morecommon ediblespecies, while beingthoroughly equippedagainst the dangers ofdeadlyvarieties, whose identification is comparatively simple.
"Toadstool" and "mushroom"
It is idle to attempt an adjudication of the vexed "toadstool" and "mushroom" question here. The toad is plainly the only final, appealable authority on this subject. It may be questioned whether he is at pains to determine the delectable or noisome qualities—from the human standpoint—of a particular fungus before deciding to settle his comfortable proportions upon its summit—if, indeed, he even so honors even the humblest of them.
The oft-repeated question, therefore, "Is this fungus a toadstool or a mushroom?" may fittingly be met by the counter query, "Is this rose a flower or a blossom?"
The so-called distinction is a purely arbitrary, popular prejudice which differentiates the "toadstool" as poisonous, the "mushroom" being considered harmless. But even the rustic authorities are rather mixed on the subject, as may be well illustrated by a recent incident in my own experience.
Popular discrimination
Walking in the woods with a country friend in quest of fungi, we were discussing this "toadstool" topic when we came upon a cluster of mushrooms at the base of a tree-trunk, their broad, expanded caps apparently upholstered in fawn-colored, undressed kid, their under surfaces being stuffed and tufted in pale greenish hue.
"What would you call those?" I inquired.
"Those are toadstools, unmistakably," he replied.
"Well, toadstools or not, you see there about two pounds of delicious vegetable meat, for it is the common species of edible boletus—Boletus edulis."
A few moments later we paused before a beautiful specimen, lifting its parasol of pure white above the black leaf mould.
"And what is this?" I inquired.
"I would certainly callthata mushroom," was his instant reply.
This mushroom proved to be a fine, tempting specimen of theAgaricus(amanita)vernus, the deadliest of the mushrooms, and one of the most violent and fatal of all known vegetable poisons, whose attractive graces and insidious wiles are doubtless continually responsible for those numerous fatalities usually dismissed with the epitaph, "Died from eating toadstools in mistake for mushrooms."
So much, therefore, for the popular distinction which makes "toadstool" a synonyme for "poisonous," and "mushroom" synonymous with "edible," and which often proves to be the "little knowledge" which is very dangerous.
The rustic authorities on "mushrooms"
The too prevalent mortality traceable to the mushroom is confined to two classes of unfortunates: 1. Those who have not learned that there is such a thing as a fatal mushroom; 2. The provincial authority who Can "tell a mushroom" by a number of his so-called infallible "tests" or "proofs." There is a large third class to whose conservative caution is to be referred the prevalent arbitrary distinction between "toadstool" and "mushroom," ardent disciples of old Tertullian, who believed in regard to toadstools that "For every different hue they display there is a pain to correspond to it, and just so many modesof death as there are distinct species," and whose obstinate dogma, "There is only one mushroom, all the rest are toadstools," has doubtless spared them an occasional untimely grave, for few of this class, from their very conservatism, ever fall victims to the "toadstool."
And what a self-complacent, patronizing, solicitous character this rustic mushroom oracle is! Go where you will in the rural districts and you are sure of him, or perhaps her—usually a conspicuous figure in the neighborhood, the village blacksmith, perhaps, or the simpler "Old Aunt Huldy." Their father and "granther" before them "knew how to tell a mushroom," and this enviable knowledge has been their particular inheritance.
How well we more special students of the fungus know him! and how he wins our tender regard with his keen solicitude for our well-being! We meet him everywhere in our travels, and always with the same old story! We emerge from the wood, perhaps, with our basket brimful of our particular fungus tidbits, topped off with specimens of red Russula and Boletus, and chance to pass him on the road or in the meadow. He scans the basket curiously as he passes us. He has perhaps heard rumors afloat that "there's a city chap in town who is tempting Providence with his foolin' with tudstools;" and with genuine solicitude and superior condescension and awe, all betrayed in his countenance, he must needs pause in his walk to relieve his mind in our behalf. I recall one characteristic episode, of which the above is the prelude.
"Ye ain't a-goin' to eatthem, air ye?" he asks, anxiously, by way of introduction.
Rustic discrimination
"I am, most certainly," I respond; "that is, if I can get my good farmer's wife to cook them without coming them and inundating them in lemon-juice."
"Waal, then, I'll say good-bye to ye," he responds, with emphasis. "Why, don't ye know them's tudstools, 'n' they'llkillye assartinaspizen? I wonder they ain't fetched ye afore this. You never larned tew tell mushrooms. My father et 'em all his life, and so hev I, 'n' Iknow'em. Come up into my garden yender 'n' I'll show ye haow to tell thereel mushroom. There's a lot of 'em thar in the hot-bed naow. Come along. I'llgiveye a mess on 'em if ye'll only throw them pizen things away."
"And how do you know that those in your gardenarereal mushrooms?" I inquire.
"Why, they ain'tanythinglikethemo' yourn. They're pink and black underneath, and peel up from the edge."
"How many kinds of mushrooms are there, do you suppose?" I ask.
"They's only theonekind; all the others istudstoolsandpizen. It's easy to tell thereelmushroom. Come up and I'll show ye. Don't eatthemthings, I beg on ye! I vaow they'llkillye!"
At this point he catches a glimpse of a Shaggy-mane mushroom, which comes to light as I tenderly fondle the specimens, and which is evidently recognized as an acquaintance.
"What!" he exclaims, in pale alarm. "Yeain'tgoin' t' eat themtoo?"
"Oh yes I am, this very evening," I respond. "I think I'll try themfirst."
A rustic authority
"Why, man, yure crazy! You don't know nothin' about 'em. I'd as soon think o' eatin' pizen outright. Them's what we call black-slime tudstools. They come up out o' manure. I've seen my muck-heap in my barnyard covered with the nasty things time 'n' ag'in. They look nice 'n' white naow, but they rot into the onsiteliest black mess ye ever see. I know wut I'm sayin'. Ye can't tell me nothin' 'baoutthemtudstools! They keep comin' up along my barn-fence all thro' the fall—bushelsof 'em."
"Well, my good friend, it's a great pity, then, that you have not learned something about toadstools as well as mushrooms, for you might have saved many a butcher's bill, and may in the future if you will only take my word that this much-abused specimen is as truly a mushroom as your pink-gilled peeler, and to my mind far more delicious."
"What! Do you mean to tell me thet you havereely eaten 'em?"
"Yes, indeed; often. Why, just look at its clean, shaggy cap, its creamy white or pink gills underneath; take a sniff of its pleasant aroma; and here! just taste a little piece—it's as sweet as a nut!" I conclude, offering him the white morsel.
"Not much! I'll make my will first, thank'ee! You let meseeye eat a mess of 'em, and if the coroner don't get ye, p'r'aps I'll try on't."
"Toadstool" prejudice
Experiences similar to this one are frequent in the career of every mycophagist, and serve to illustrate the pity and solicitude which he awakens among his fellow-mortals, as well as to emphasize the prevalent superstitions regarding the comparative virtues of the mushroom and toadstool—a prejudice which, by-the-way, in the absence of available popular literature on the subject, and the actual dangers which encompass their popular distinction, is a most beneficent public safeguard.
Popular tests and superstitions
The mushroom which "he can tell" is generally theAgaricus campestris, or one of its several varieties; and knowing this alone, and tempted by no other, this sort of village oracle escapes the fate which often awaits another class, who are not thus conservative, and who extend their definition of mushroom (a word supposed to be synonymous with "edible"), and this mainly through the indorsement of certain so-called infallible tests handed down to them from their forefathers, and by which the esculent varieties may be distinguished from the poisonous. By these so-called "tests" or "proofs" the identification of certain species is gradually acquired. The rural fungus epicure now "knows them by sight," or perhaps has received his information second-hand, and makes his selection without hesitation, with what success may be judged from the incident in my own experience already noted—one which, knowing as I did the frequency and confidence with which my country friend sampled the fungi at histable, filled me with consternation and anxiety for his future.
"How, then, shall we distinguish a mushroom from a toadstool?"
There is no way of distinguishing them, for they are the same.
"How, then, shall we know a poisonous toadstool from a harmless one?" the reader hopelessly exclaims.
This discrimination is by no means as difficult as is popularly supposed, but in the first place, the student must entirely rid himself of all preconceived notions and traditions, such as the following almost world-wide "tests," many of which are easily demonstrated to be worse than worthless, and have doubtless frequently led to an untimely funeral. Some of these are merely local, and in widely separated districts are supplanted by others equally arbitrary and absurd, while many of them are as old as history.
WORTHLESS TRADITIONAL TESTS FOR THEDISCRIMINATION OF POISONOUS AND EDIBLE MUSHROOMS
FAVORABLE SIGNS
1. Pleasant taste and odor.2. Peeling of the skin of the cap from rim to centre.3. Pink gills, turning brown in older specimens.4. The stem easily pulled out of the cap and inserted in it like a parasol handle.5. Solid stems.6. Must be gathered in the morning.7. "Any fungus having a pleasant taste and odor, being found similarly agreeable after being plainly broiled without the least seasoning, is perfectly safe."
UNFAVORABLE SIGNS
8. Boiling with a "silver spoon," the staining of the silver indicating danger.9. Change of color in the fracture of the fresh mushroom.10. Slimy or sticky on the top.11. Having the stems at their sides.12. Growing in clusters.13. Found in dark, damp places.14. Growing on wood, decayed logs, or stumps.15. Growing on or near manure.16. Having bright colors.17. Containing milky juice.18. Having the gill plates of even length.19. Melting into black fluid.20. Biting the tongue or having a bitter or nauseating taste.21. Changing color by immersion in salt-water, or upon being dusted with salt.
These present but a selection of the more prevalent notions. Takenin toto, they would prove entirely safe, as they would practically exclude every species of mushroom or toadstool that grows. But as a rule the village oracle bases his infallibility upon two or three of the above "rules," and inasmuch as the entire list absolutelyomitstheonlyone test by which danger is to be avoided, it is a seven-days' wonder that the grewsome toadstool epitaph is not more frequent.
Absolute worthlessness of above tests
I once knew an aged dame who was accepted as a village oracle on this as well as other topics, such as divining, palmistry, and fortune-telling, and who ate and dispensed toadstools on a few of the above rules. Strange to say, she lived to a good old age, and no increased mortality is credited to her memory as a result of her generosity.
How are these popular notions sustained by the facts? Let us analyze them seriatim and confront each with its refutation, the better to show their entire untrustworthiness.
Worthless popular tests
Pleasant taste and odor(1) is a conspicuous feature in the regular "mushroom" (Agaricus campestris), and most other edible fungi, but as a criterion for safety it is a mockery. The deadlyAgaricus amanita, already mentioned, has an inviting odor and to most people a pleasant taste when raw, and being cooked and eaten gives no token of its fatal resources until from six to twelve hours after, when its unfortunate victim is past hope. (See p. 68.)
Theready peelingof the skin (2) is one of the most widely prevalent proofs of probation, and is often considered asufficienttest; yet the Amanita will be found to peel with a degree of accommodation which would thus at once settle its claims as a "mushroom." Indeed, a large number of species, including several poisonous kinds, will peel as perfectly as the Campestris.
The pink gills turning brown(3) is a marked characteristic of the "mushroom" (A. campestris,Plate 5), and, being a rare tint among the fungus tribe, is really one of the most valuable of the tests, especially as it is limited by rules affecting other pink-gilled species.
The stem being easily pulled out of the cap(4) applies to several edible species, but equally to the poisonous.
The notion thatedible mushrooms have solid stems(5) would be a very unsafe talisman for us to take to the woods in our search for fungus-food. Many poisonous species are thus solid—the emetic Russula, for example—while the alleged importance of themorning specimens(6) is without the slightest foundation.
The passage quoted here (7), or a statement to the same effect, was quite widely circulated in the newspapers a dozen or more years ago, in an article which bore all the indications of authoritative utterance, the assumption being that the poisonous mushroom would invariably give some forbidding token to the senses by which it might be discriminated.
Woe to the fungus epicure who should sample his mushrooms and toadstools on such a criterion as this, as themost fatal of all mushrooms, theAmanita vernus, would fulfil all these requisites.
The discoloration of silver(8) is a test as old as Pliny at least, a world-wide popular touchstone for the detection of deleterious fungi, but useful only in the fact that it will often exclude a poison not contemplated in the discrimination. On this point, especially as it affords opportunity to emphasize a common disappointment of the mushroom-eater, I quote from a recent work by Julius A. Palmer (see Bibliography, No. 3): "Mushrooms decay very rapidly. In a short time a fair, solid fungus becomes a mass of maggots which eat its tissue until its substance ishoney-combed; these cells, on a warm day, are charged with the vapors of decomposition. Now you put such mushrooms as these (and I have seen just such on the markets of Boston and London) over the fire. In boiling, sulphuretted hydrogen or other noxious gases are liberated; you stir with a bright spoon and it is discolored; proud of your test, you throw away your stew. Now this is right, but if from this you conclude that all fungus which discolors silver is poisonous and that which leaves it bright is esculent, you are in dangerous error. It is the same with fish at sea. Tradition says that you must fry a piece of silver with them and throw them away if it discolors. Certainly the experiment does no harm, and shows a decomposition in both cases which might have been detected without the charm." Opposed to this so-called talisman, how grim is the fact that the deadliest of all mushrooms, the Amanita, in its fresh condition, has no effect upon silver.
Worthless popular tests
The change of color in fracture(9) has long been a ban to the fungus as food. But this would exclude several very delicious species, which turn bluish, greenish, and red when broken—viz.,Boletus subtomentosus(Plate 22),Boletus strobilaceus(Plate 23), and Lactarius (Plate 18).
The "toadstools" with "sticky tops"thus discriminated against (10) include a number of esculent species, Boleti and Russulæ, and others, as do also the varieties with side-stems (11)—viz.,Agaricus ulmarius(Plate 15),Fistulina hepatica(Plate 25),Agaricus ostreatus(Plate 14), etc.
The clustered fungi(12) have long been included in the black-list without reason, as witness the following esteemed esculent species: The Shaggy-mane (Plate 16),Coprinus atramentarius(Plate 17), Oyster mushroom (Plate 14), Elm mushroom (Plate 15), Puff-balls (Plate 34), and Champignon (Plate 8).
To excludeall fungi which grow in dark, damp places(13) is a singular inconsistency, as in some localities this would eliminate the very one species of "mushroom" admittedly eatable by popular favor. In many countries these are regularly cultivated for market in dark, damp, subterranean caverns or in cellars. Indeed, the "dark, damp place" would appear to be the ideal habitat of this the "only mushroom!"
Equally absurd is the discrimination against thosegrowing on wood(14), which again deprives us of the delicious Hydnum (Plate 27), the Beefsteak (Plate 25), Oyster mushroom (Plate 14), Elm mushroom (Plate 15), and many others, including Puff-balls (Plate 34). If we exclude those growingupon or near manure(15), we shall be obliged to omit the Coprinus group (Plates16and17), and often the "reelmushroom" as well.
Among thebright-colored species(16), it is true, are many dangerous individuals, as, for instance, the deadly Fly Amanita ofPlate 4, and the emetic Russula (Plate 13), but on this fiat we should have to reject the other brilliant esculent Russulæ (Plates11and12), the brilliant yellow Chantarelle (Plate 19), the Lactarius (Plate 18), and various other equally palatable and wholesome species.
Worthless popular tests
The objection againstmilky mushrooms(17) would serve to exclude the poisonous species of Lactarius, but would thus include at least two of the delicious species of the group,L. deliciosus, with orange milk (Plate 18), andL. piperatus, another species with white milk not figured in this volume.
The group of Russulæ, most of which are esculent, is notable for theirgills of even length(18), though not all the species are thus characterized. This discrimination, however, especially applies to the Shaggy-mane (Plate 16), which is conspicuously even-gilled, and is a decided delicacy.
This species, together with its congener, the edibleCoprinus atramentarius(Plate 17), are notorious for theirmelting into black fluid(19), which is thus of no significance as a test, although the mushrooms are not supposed to be eaten in this stage of deliquescence.
A fungus whichbites the tongue(20) when tasted would naturally be excluded from our mushroom diet, as would also, of course, those of abitter or nauseating taste; but several species, notably theLactarius piperatus, as its name implies, is very hot and peppery when raw—a characteristic which disappears in cooking, after which it is perfectly esculent. The same applies in a scarcely less degree to theAgaricus melleus, and less so to theHydnum repandum(Plate 27), and other mushrooms. But the poisonousRussula emetica(Plate 13) gives this same hot, warning tang, and this rule (17) would at least thus exclude the harmful species, and is thus contributive to popular safety.
Worthless popular tests
The salt test(21), with that of the silver charm, is also a relic of the dim past, but is absolutely useless as a touchstone. Many poisonous species, notably the Amanita, fail to answer to it. All authorities agree, however, that the addition of salt in cooking, or the preparatory soaking of specimens in brine, has a tendency to render poisonous species innocuous. Indeed, it is claimed that in Russia and elsewhere on the Continent many admittedly poisonous species, even the deadly Fly Amanita, is habitually eaten subsequent to this semi-corning process, by which the poisonous chemical principle is neutralized.
Omission of the only true test
Among this long list, and many other equally arbitrary and ignorant prejudicial traditions, many of which date back to the earliest times, it is indeed astonishing to note theconspicuous absenceof the one and only valuable sign by which the fatal species could be unmistakably determined—a symbol which was reserved for botanical science to discover: the presence of the "cup" in the Amanita, which is pointedly emphasized in my Frontispiece, and the importance of which as a botanical and cautionary distinction is considered at more length in the following chapter.
It is well to consider for a moment what is implied in
A fungus may be poisonous in various ways:1. A distinct and certain deadly poison.2. The cause of violent digestive or other functional disturbance, but not necessarily fatal.3. The occasion of more or less serious physical derangement through mere indigestibility.4. Productive of similar disorders through the employment of decayed or wormy specimens of perfectly esculent species.5. These same esculent species, even in their fresh condition, may become highly noxious by contact or confinement with specimens of the Amanita by the absorption of its volatile poison, as further described onp. 69.
Concerning idiosyncrasy
And lastly comes the question of idiosyncrasy, a consideration which is of course not taken into account in our recommendation of certain well-established food varieties.
Decaying mushrooms
Fresh specimens
"One man's food another man's poison." The scent of the rose is sometimes a serious affliction, and even the delicious strawberry has repeatedly proven a poison. Even the most wholesome mushroom will occasionally require to be discriminated against, as certain individuals find it necessary to exclude cabbage, milk, onions, and other common food from their diet. When we reflect, moreover, that in its essential chemical affinities the fungus simulates animal flesh, and many of the larger and more solid varieties are similarly subject to speedy decomposition, it is obviously important thatall fungi procured for the table should be collected in their prime, and prepared and served as quickly as possible. More than one case of supposed mushroom poisoning could be directly traced to carelessness in this regard, when the species themselves, in their proper condition, had been perfectly wholesome.
No general rule for identification
There can be no general rule laid down for the discrimination ofan edible fungus. Each must belearnedas a species, or at least familiarized as a kind, even as we learn to recognize certain flowers, trees, or birds.
Within a certain range this discrimination is practised by the merest child. How are the robin, the chippy, and the swallow recognized, or the red clover, and white clover, and yellow clover?
Simple botanical discrimination
Even in the instances of species which bear a very close outward similarity, how simple, after all, does the distinction become. Here, for instance, is the wild-lettuce, and its mimic, themulgedium, growing side by side—to ninety-nine out of a hundred observersabsolutely alike, and apparently the same species. But how readily are they distinguished, I will not say by the botanist merely, but by any one who will take the small pains of contrasting their specific botanical characters—perfectly infallible, no matter how various the masquerade of their foliage. The lettuce has yellow blossoms, and a seed prolonged into along beak, to whose tip the feathery pappus is attached. The mulgedium has dull bluish flowers, and its pappus is attached to the seed by a hardly perceptible elongation. As with the birds and wild-flowers, so with the fungi: we must learn them as species, evenas we learn to distinguish the difference between the trefoil of the clover and that of the wood-sorrel, or between the innocuous wild-carrot and the poison-hemlock, the harmless stag-horn sumach and its venomous congener, theRhus venenata. There are parallel outward resemblances between esculent and poisonous fungi, but each possesses otherwise its own special features by which it may be identified—variations of gills, pores, spores, taste, odor, color, juice, consistency of pulp, method of decay, etc.
It must not be presumed that the list of edible species just cited from the catalogue of Dr. Curtis includes all the esculents among the fungi. Dr. Harkness has discovered and classified many others. Mr. Palmer and Prof. Charles Peck are never at a loss for their "mess of mushrooms" among their list of nearly a hundred species, while Mr. Charles McIlvaine, whose name, so far as its practical authority is concerned, should appear more prominently in my bibliographical list, but who has not yet incorporated his many mycological essays in book form, writes me that he has tested gastronomically a host of species, and has found overthree hundredto be edible, or at least harmless. It may be said that the probabilities would include a large majority of the thousand species in the same category. But this is a matter which, in the absence of absolute knowledge, is mere conjecture.
Of the forty-odd species which the writer enjoys with more or less frequency at his table, he is satisfied that he can select at least thirty which possess such distinct and strongly marked characters of form,structure, and other special qualities as to enable them, by the aid of careful portraiture and brief description, to be easily recognized, even by a tyro.
As previously emphasized, the present work does not aim to be complete, nor does it contemplate a practical utility beyond its specific recommendations, nor will the author assume any responsibility for the hazard which shall exceed its restricted list of species.
Humanity and forbidden fruit
On general principles, however, considering the proneness of humanity towards the acquisition of forbidden fruit, and reasoning from my own actual experience, and that of many others to whom this fascinating hobby of epicurean fungology has become a growing passion, it may almost be assumed that the fungus appetite with many of my readers will increase by what it feeds on, and the sufficiency herewith offered will scarcely suffice. Like Oliver Twist, they must needs havemore. The glory of a new acquisition to the fungus menu, and emulation of other rival tyro mycophagists, will doubtless lead many enthusiasts to more or less hazardous experiment among the legion of the unknown species. This logical tendency, then, must be met ere my book can safely and conscientiously be launched upon its career, to which purpose I would append the following condensed
1. Avoid every mushroom having acup, orsuggestionof such, at base (seeFrontispiece, and Plates3and4); the distinctly fatal poisons are thus excluded.2. Exclude those having an unpleasant odor, a peppery, bitter, or other unpalatable flavor, or tough consistency.3. Exclude those infested with worms, or in advanced age or decay.4. In testing others which will pass the above probation let the specimen bekept by itself, not in contact with or enclosed in the same basket with other species, for reasons given onpage 69.
Testing new species
Begin by a mere nibble, the size of a pea, and gentle mastication, being careful to swallow no saliva, and finally expelling all from the mouth. If no noticeable results follow, the next trial, with the interval of a day, with the same quantity may permit of a swallow of a little of the juice, the fragments of the fungus expelled as before.
No unpleasantness following for twenty-four hours, the third trial may permit of a similar entire fragment being swallowed, all of these experiments to be made on "an empty stomach." If this introduction of the actual substance of the fungus into the stomach is superseded by no disturbance in twenty-four hours, a larger piece, the size of a hazel-nut, may be attempted, and thus the amount gradually increased day by day until the demonstration of edibility, or at least harmlessness, is complete, and the species thus admitted into the "safe" list. By following this method with the utmost caution the experimenter can at best suffer but a slight temporary indisposition as the result of his hardihood, in the event of a noisome species havingbeen encountered, and will at least thus have the satisfaction of discovery of an enemy if not a friend.
Mr. McIlvaine's general rule
It may be said that any mushroom,omitting the Amanita, which is pleasant to the taste and otherwise agreeable as to odor and texture when raw, is probably harmless, and may safely be thusventured onwith a view of establishing its edibility. A prominent authority on our edible mushrooms, already mentioned, applies this rule to all the Agarics with confidence. "This rule may be established," he says: "All Agarics—excepting the Amanitæ—mild to the taste when raw, if they commend themselves in other ways, are edible." This claim is borne out in his experience, with the result, already told, that he now numbers over one hundred species among his habitual edible list out of the three hundred which he has actually found by personal test to be edible or harmless. "So numerous are toadstools," he continues, "and so well does a study of them define their habits and habitats, that the writernever fails upon any day from April to December to find ample supply of healthy, nutritious, delicate toadstools for himself and family." The italicized portion is my own, as I would thus emphasize the similar possibilities amply afforded even in the present condensed list of about thirty varieties herein described.
Hints to mushroom-gatherers
In gathering mushrooms one should be supplied with a sharp knife. The mushroom should be carefully cut off an inch or so below the cap, or at least sufficiently far above the ground to escape all signs of dirt on the stem. They should then be laid gillsupward in their receptacle, and it is well to have a special basket, arranged with one or two removable bottoms or horizontal partitions, which are kept in place by upright props within, thus relieving the lower layers of mushrooms from the weight of those above them. Such a basket is almost indispensable.
Insects infesting mushrooms
Before preparing mushrooms for the table, the specimens should be carefully scrutinized for a class of fungus specialists which we have not taken into account, and which have probably anticipated us. The mushroom is proverbial for its rapid development, but nature has not allowed it thus to escape the usual penalties of lush vegetation, as witness this swarming, squirming host, minute grubs, which occasionally honey-comb or hollow its entire substance ere it has reached its prime; indeed, in many cases, even before it has fully expanded or even protruded above ground.
History of fungus insects
Like the carrion-flies, the bees, and wasps, which in early times were believed to be of spontaneous origin—flies being generated from putrefaction, bees from dead bulls, and the martial wasps from defunct "war-horses"—these fungus swarms which so speedily reduce a fair specimen of a mushroom to a melting loathsome mass, were also supposed to be the natural progeny of the "poisonous toadstool." But science has solved the riddle of their mysterious omnipresence among the fungi, each particular swarm of grubs being the witness of a former visit of amaternal parent insect, which has sought the budding fungus in its haunts often before it has fully revealed itself to human gaze, and implanted within its substance her hundred or more eggs. To the uneducated eye these larvæ all appear similar, but the specialist in entomology readily distinguishes between them as the young of this or that species of fly, gnat, or beetle.
As an illustration of the assiduity with which the history of these tiny scavenger insects has been followed by science, I may mention that in the gnat group alone over seven hundred species have been discovered and scientifically described, many of them requiring a powerful magnifier to reveal their identities.
Specimens of infected or decaying mushrooms preserved within a tightly closed box—and, we would suggest, duly quarantined—will at length reveal the imago forms of the voracious larvæ: generally a swarm of tiny gnats or flies, with an occasional sprinkling of small glossy black beetles, or perhaps a beautiful indigo-blue insect half an inch in length, of most nervous habit, and possessed of a long and very active tail. This insect is an example of the curious group of rove-beetles—staphylinus—a family of insect scavengers, many of whose species depend upon the fungi for subsistence.
Even the large woody growth known as "punk" or "touch-wood," so frequently seen upon decaying trunks, is not spared. A huge specimen in my keeping was literally reduced to dust by a single species of beetle.
A wise precaution
Considering the prevalence of these fungus hosts, it is well in all mushrooms to take the precaution of making a vertical section through stem and cap, excluding such specimens as are conspicuously monopolized, and not beingtoocritical of the rest, for the over-fastidious gourmet will often thus have little to show for his morning walk. I have gathered a hundred specimens of fungi in one stroll, perhaps not a quarter of which, upon careful scrutiny, though fair of exterior, would be fit for the table. The fungus-hunterpar excellencehas usually been there before us and left his mark (see page 135)—a mere fine brown streak or tunnel, perhaps, winding through the pulp or stem, where his minute fungoid identity is even yet secreted. But we bigger fungus-eaters gradually learn to accept him—if not too outrageously promiscuous—as a natural part and parcel of ourHachis aux Champignons, or our simple mushrooms on toast, even as we wink at the similar lively accessories which sophisticate our delectable raisins, prunes, and figs, to say nothing of prime old Rochefort!
In conclusion, lest these pages, in spite of the impress of caution with which they are weighted, should lead to discomfiture, distress, or more serious results among their more careless readers, it is well to devote a few lines to directions for medical treatment where such should seem to be required. To this end I quote a passage from an article in theTherapeutic Gazetteof May, 1893, from the pen of Mr. McIlvaine, whose many years' experience with gastronomic fungi entitles his words to careful consideration: