THE NATURAL HISTORY OF THE OYSTER. 171 



the Emperor Vitellius could eat a thousand of these bivalves at a meal. 

 What vitals must this Vitellius have had ! Who would dare under- 

 take to victual such a glutton as that ? It is said of that gentle wag, 

 Charles Lamb, that, on a certain occasion, the omnibus in which he 

 rode was stopped by a man, who poked in his head and bluffly asked, 

 " All full in there ? " To which Lamb meekly made response, " I 

 don't know how it is with the rest but that last piece of oyster-pie 

 did the business for me ! " But this Vitellius was not so easily done 



IMS. 



Pig. 9. Fragment of the Tongue-file, or Lingual Ribbon, of the Whelk (Buccinum 



undatum), magnified. 



for as that comes to. Having engulfed his fill of these ostrean inno- 

 cents, this royal gourmand would open the sluice-gate of his kingly 

 maw, and cause a slave to tickle the fauces with a peacock's feather. 

 This, acting as an elevator, effected a full discharge of the beastly 

 cargo of that carnal vessel. This done, that ostreaceous appetite 

 would load up afresh. Would not the evertible stomach of a star- 

 fish have been an inestimable blessing to that imperial beast ? 



Dietetics of the Oystee. Are oysters good to eat ? Said Mon- 

 taigne, '" To he subject to colic, or deny one's self oysters, presents two 

 evils to choose from." This is very fine for Montaigne, but it is a libel 

 for all that. Besides, he was a sickly man at best of times. Says 

 Reveille-Paris : " There is no alimentary substance, not even excepting 

 bread, which does not produce indigestion under given circumstances, 

 but oysters never. We may eat them to-day, to-morrow, eat them 

 always, and in profusion, without fear of indigestion." It is said that 

 the first Napoleon always ate oysters on the eve of his great battles, 

 if they could be got. Says Figuier: " The oyster may thus be said to 

 be the palm and glory of the table. It is considered the very perfec- 

 tion of digestive aliment. . . . The small proportion of nutritive matter 

 explains the extreme digestibility of the oyster." It *'is nothing more 

 than water slightly gelatinized." But, if we would have authority the 

 most recent, and thoroughly trustworthy, let us go to that little book 

 in the " International Scientific Series," " Foods," by Edward Smith, 

 M. D. Here we have the dictum of the physiologist : " The oyster is 

 not a food of high nutritive value, but is nevertheless useful to the 

 sick, while its delicacy of flavor leads to its selection when other foods 

 are rejected. The more usual mode is to eat it when uncooked ; and 

 it is very doubtful whether cooking increases its digestibility. It is, 

 however, possible that the flavor of scalloped maybe preferred to that 

 of the raw oysters, or that the vinegar which is usually eaten with the 

 latter may be disliked, or may disagree with the stomach, but, w T ith 



