FRANCIS HAMILTON (ONCE BUCHANAN), Ізін 
Montgomery Martin to ‘collate’ from the original documents at the East India house 
a work on Eastern India, which is found when critically examined to consist of Hamil. 
ton's reports of the Bengal Survey with those parts left out whieh the collater did not 
understand or which did not interest him. Day found the allusions to Fish and 
Fisheries, one of Hamilton's favourite subjects, so casual in Martin's edition that they 
were useless both from the scientific and the economic point of view. With exemplary 
piety he printed verbatim, with an introduction and explanatory notes of his own, 
Hamilton's original account of the Bengal fisheries? The same is equally true of 
the allusions to plants and vezetation ; unfortunately no one has had the time to do 
for these what Day has done for the fishes. Beveridge on the other hand finds that 
Martin has left out much less that is of value in the historical or anti 
quarian chapters," 
though he has been able to contribute a series of most interesting 
passages omitted by 
Martin. Martin's edition of the work is marred by an unsuitable introduction and a 
somewhat tedious dedication; the title-page* is distinguished by the absence of the author's 
name and the substitution of Martin's own. This substitution has given rise to many 
severe remarks, but the writer agrces with Beveridge in believing that the procedure 
was & simple act of folly, and that Martin had no intention either of passing off the 
work as his own or of depriving Hamilton of the merit of having written it. If, 
however, we can with Beveridge acquit Martin of anything more serious than. 
stupidity as regards his title-page, we must admit that Martin had extremely rudi- 
mentary ideas of the duties of an elitor, and that his work in this direction is as 
primitive and unsatisfactory as Hunter alleges it to be. This, however, is only a 
misfortune and, as Beveridge says, ‘one is disposed to feel grateful to Mr. Martin 
for having done something.’ In one respect, however, Martin’s conduct was truly 
criminal; he provided no index for the work. 
The following list exhibits in chronological sequence the various publications 
referred to in the foregoing paragraphs:— 
1. De Febribus intermittentibus medendis. 1 vol. Edinburgh: 1783. Graduation 
Thesis; M.D. 
2. Description of the tree, called by the Burmas Launzan. Asiatick Researches v. 
123: 1798. | 
9. A comparative Vocabulary of some of the Languages spoken in the Burma 
Empire. Asiatick Researches v. 919: 1798. | 
' Hunter: Imperial Gazetteer of India, vi. p. 205, footnote. т А 
` Fish and Fisheries of Bengal; edited, with an introduction and notes, by Surgeon-Major Francis Day, 
Inspector-General of Fisheries in India: A Statistical Account of Bengal. xx. 1877. ' 
* Beveridge : Calcutta Review for July 1894. : 
° Beveridge: loc. cit. The passages include the following: Discovery of fe» statuer in Йе ging lt аны 
Patna: the Panchpahari at Patna: the worship of Buddha, аз а Hindu goddess, at ien г HN | the мий of 
Patna and Goya; а short account of an old fort called Lakragar: the н же, 
Tàrgra: Origin of the caste of the Sarvariyas : the Kosi. us m quu ык 
x * The History, Antiquities, Topography, and Statisties of Eastern India, n nini M с 
Shahabad, Bhagalpoor, Goruckpoor, Dinagepoor, Риғатіуа, Rungpoor p gr en Education, 
Mineralogy, Botany, Agriculture, Commerce, Manufactures, Fine Arts, Population, . мешін а the East India 
surveyed under the orders of the Supreme Government, MN [ү uo ис. 3 vols. 8уо. London: 1838. 
House with the permission of the Honowrable Court of Directors, by Montgomery 
