362 Mr. P. J. Brown's Beply lo the Answer of a Cm-respondent 



sible, the result of my discoveries, in a periodical journal : my 

 plan of the temple, and a brief notice of my labours, have in- 

 deed already appeared in one of these for January last. 



It appears to me that the whole aggregate of Egyptian anti- 

 quities would speedily be laid open for the investigation of Eu- 

 ropean archaeologists, were it not for a sort of jealous rivalship 

 that has crept in among the explorers of these scientific riches. 

 The most valuable and indeed the most proper instrument for 

 these purposes, in respect of his physical force and capabilities, 

 I mean M. Belzoni, is about to leave Egypt. A report prevails 

 that, on his return to Cairo from his last expedition, one of the 

 agents of M. D. assaulted, and actually fired a pistol at him. 

 This circumstance was mentioned to me by M. Briggs, on his 

 arrival from Alexandria. 



This event should not, however, be a source of alarm to Eu- 

 ropeans inclined to undertake journeys into a country so inter- 

 esting. For my own part, it is my intention to return thither; 

 and I can only speak well of the native inhabitants, with whom 

 I have lived for some time in tlie bonds of an amicable inter- 



LVII. Reply by Mr. P. J. Bbown to the Answer of a Corre-' 

 spondent on Professor Jameson's System of Mineralogy, 



To Mr. Til loch. 



Sir, — A coRREsroNDENT under the signature of G. M. hav-, 

 ing, in your Magazine for April, offered some reply to my re- 

 marks on Professor Jameson's 3rd edition of his System of Mi- 

 neralogv, I beg to submit the following observations in return. 



I am first accused of confounding a natural history method 

 with a natural method. Not having had the advantage of Pro- 

 fessor Jameson's instruction, I can reconcile myself, without aa 

 effort, to my incapacity for appreciating distinctions without dif*- 

 ferences ; and shall be content with the observation that, whatever 

 shades of Jamesonian twilight may exist, a natural history method 

 at variance with a natural method is a solecism in language cer- 

 tainly bevond my " inferior apprehension." 



G. M. erroneously supjjoses Professor Jameson to have been 

 censured for deviating from a chemical arrangement: he is 

 blamed for adopting a derangement which compels him to de- 

 viate from nature. 



- " Nunquam aliud natura, aliud sapicntia dicit." 



Your correspondent evidently considers me a staunch advocate 

 for a chemical system. I can with pleasure assure him, that I 



am 



