The Montgomery advertiser., 1905-07-30
IN THE NAME OF THE PROPHET,
 FROGSl

At couraging to know that the lowly and humble batrachian whose resonant voice makes music for the dwellers near the ponds and still waters of the south ern and middle sections of the country is at last to be given the recognition he deserves and which has been so long withheld. The Kansas City Jour- nal adds this to our stock of infor- nation:
 Recently the United States Fish Com mission decided to investigate the virtues of the frog and take measures for his protection and propagation. me preliminary researches of the experts proSueins pno% ssGl State to in De the @ Union The Missouri frog, like the Missouri mule, has long been content to bask In modest obscurity, not Haunting itself nour P9ss fros also np Misa Re Re RtG mule is noted for his depth of lung and strength of limb. In the southern part of the State the primeval swamps echo to the rythmic calls of millions of bull ernment will use all reasonable expedi. tion in safeguarding the interests or the Missouri frog. He certainly IS worthy of such tardy recognition ana
  the fruitful frog will take rank with the helpful hen as an element of wealth production in this State.
 Now that is something like it. but there will so up from all over the South strenuous objection to this effort to have the name of the Missouri frog. like that of Abou Ben Adhem. lead all the rest We have heard 1t hinted that the frogs of Mississippi. Louisiana and other extreme Southern States are something colossal in size as well as in voice, and in various other sections of the Union they are numerous, active and musical. A concert Of well-grown and thoroughly developed bull-frogs Is no slouch in the way of music to those whose ears are attuned to that kind of melody.
 But we are glad the government Is | going to put its experts to work on our | ng-legged acquaintance for there are 1 several mysteries about him that we want explained. and one of the first and greatest of them begins with his first | appearAnce A casual observer who sees a blanket of small black objects spread on the surface of a quiet pond or lake might ask what they were. and on being told that they are frogs eggs he would naturally infer that in course of time they would hatch out young frogs, just as hens eggs hatch chickens
 That would be the natural inference. but that Is where the uninformed ob- server would slip up The eggs hatch tadpoles and a baby tadpole Is a tiny black creature with a tail. a pointed mouth and no legs. and he lives en- tirely in the water. Neither does 1t have any voice that anybody ever heard or heard of, for to all intents and pur- poses he is a fish. After the lapse of some weeks the tail begins to disap- pear and simultaneously two hind legs put forth. little longer in a state of probation and two front legs put in their appearance. all the tall gets out of sight and pretty soon the former fish becomes an animal. It can then live in the air, catch flies, hop out of sight and sing double-bass in way to cause mankind to turn green with envy. From being a rather helpless and silent fish with long tail 1t be- comes an active and noisy animal with no tail at all.
 Now we want the wise guys to tell us what is the use of all this round- about method of getting there? Why couldn't 1t be a frog. even If a little one, when 1t left the egg. and not travel all around the plantation to accomplish its object? What was the use of taking a start in the water and finishing the job on land? And we want to know something about that caudal business what be- comes of it and why We are told by the books that 1t Is absorbed and we suppose the tall is used to build the legs of. but why so much circumlocu- ton? Why doesn't a monkey absorb his tall to help construct his long legs if that's the way the job Is done? And where does daddy frogs big voice come from? The tadpole has none, but when he is reconstructed he takes on voice like a fog-horn. That Is another of the mysteries of nature that we want unfolded and made plain.
 We admit that all this Is aside from the subject of frogs as a food crop, but we were rather leading up to 1t. When we come to think of the matter seri- ously we can but feel surprise that comparatively little attention has been given to this part of the matter in this country. The French have long known their value and have been such consumers of them that they have ac- quired the nickname of frog eaters" in consequence. Frog-steak or hams are as popular there as quail on toast Is with us and therein they evidently shows their good taste, for we have been reliably informed that when the rear legs of we'll grown bull frog are properly prepared they form deli ciously toothsome addition to the ordi- nary bill of fare. They are not only good, but very good. say the epicures. It may not be out of place to add that our English cousins are not fully edu- cated up to frog diet, neither are the Americans, but we will get there. and the huge bull-frog, which we believe Is an American product, will fill long felt want.
 There is nothing improbable in the