LOCUST-EATERS. 67 



Locust-eaters, as monsters of singularity in their mode of diet. 

 Was not "the Locust after its kind" expressly allowed for 

 food by the Mosaic Law ? and from the time of its institution 

 even to the present, does not the Law of Nature, ever kind and 

 provident, permit this insect scourge of humanity to be con- 

 verted into a medium of supporting human life ? Since in all 

 countries a prey to their ravages, in Syria, Arabia, Persia, 

 Ethiopia, Egypt, and Barbary, locusts are still an article of 

 provision, in more or less extensive use. And from what but 

 prejudice arises our disgust at Insect-feeding? 



Instead of thanking our stars for our own discriminating 

 taste, let us rather thank Providence for that omnivorous appe- 

 tite common to our race. 



We only marvel that Gastronomy (than whom even Ne- 

 cessity herself can scarcely boast a more numerous progeny of 

 inventions and resources) should not, in the demand of her 

 votaries for new modes, have been led to seek more frequently 

 for new materiel out of the Insect Kingdom. This, however, 

 may be reserved for some future time. Cockchafers and 

 Chafer grubs may yet become articles for the London spring- 

 market, and Pates de Sauterelles may yet have a place in 

 second courses. 



When from inward regalements we turn to outward adorn- 

 ments, we are instantly reminded of our obligations to those 

 spinning millions, 



" That in their green shops weave the smooth-haired silk." 



But stay ! are we indeed debtors to those busy insect-artificers, 

 who, by furnishing material for velvet robes and silken gowns 

 and silken banners, have ministered so largely to the pride of 

 the eye and the pride of life? May not the Silk-worm be 

 ranked rather among the dangerous than the useful gifts of 

 nature ? We think not ; for assuredly, if Silk-worms and silk 

 had never been, some other production, how coarse soever, 

 would have served just as well to keep human vanitv alive and 



