I note your comments on the statement of the London Medical Times, that "all mushrooms are more or less poisonous." The term "mushroom" is rather vague, but it seems to be intended here to apply to all those larger fleshy species of toadstools which might, from their appearance, be used as human food. Of course we have no exact knowledge of the real proportion between the edible or harmless species and those which are poisonous. But few persons would care to subject themselves to a test of this kind. Quite a large number are noted by Fries in his "Systerna MycologLcene," and by others of the old mycologists, as "edible." Some are also known to be poisonous, and therefore great care should be used in preparing them for the table.

As far as my knowledge and experience go in these matters, I am inclined to believe that so far as the statement "all mushrooms are more or less poisonous," is from being true, that on the contrary, most mushrooms are innocuous (except that they may be tasteless or indigestible), and that those which are actively poisonous are comparatively few. I base my belief partly on my own experience, but chiefly on the investigations and trials made by the late Dr. Curtis, the eminent American mycologist, for a series of years, on the mushrooms of North Carolina. For a period of about thirty years, closing only with his life, we were in constant correspondence on botanical subjects. During the war, when fresh meats were not always to be had, Dr. C. would often say jocularly that he was testing our common native mushroom, and found many of them really delicious, some quite palatable, and others to be discarded as tasteless or uninviting. Almost every letter during the warmer months had something of new discoveries in the gastronomic qualities of Agarics or other allied genera of mushrooms; of some of the Boleti, and of the fleshy Polypori or other soft and tender species, which, found in sufficient abundance, might be desirable.

In no single case that I recollect, did he suffer any evil consequences from their use. Of course he exercised judgment in this groping of his way, as it were, in the dark. All the species noted in the books as "edible" he used without hesitation. Species of similar habits and appearance, though botanically different, were also tested with some care. Such as were known to be poisonous, or had an offensive and repugnant look, were avoided. Boletus Satanas, which Lenz, the discoverer, so named, because he had tried it, and proved its poisonous properties, "vitae periculo" was carefully avoided, whilst some other species of Boletus were found to be good.

Dr. Curtis in this way tested over one hundred of our American species of mushrooms. He had accurate drawings made by his son, and colored from living specimens, he himself writing the descriptions so they might be recognized by persons who were not familiar with botanical terms, with the intention of publication. "Mycophagia," as its title indicated, I know was completed and placed in the hands of the printers; he so stated to me in one of his last letters, but a few months previous to his death; but why, after an interval of more than ten years, it has never been published, I am unable to say.

[The drift of the paper in the Medical Times is that all mushrooms are poisonous "when they are uncooked." - Ed. G. M.]