cxl Proceedings of the Asiatic Society. £Dec. 1844. 



1 . The great merit of every pictorial work is, that it be either a faithful representation, 

 or a faithful copy of the original representation when it is to be multiplied by the press : 

 for from the moment that an artist is permitted to improve a drawing or a sketch, un- 

 less he does so under the eye of the person who first made it, the chances are a hun- 

 dred to one that what it gains as a picture it loses as an honest copy of what was done 

 on the spot. Major Jervis' lithograph of the Argemone Mexicana seems to have been 

 subjected to improvement. It is too elegant for our common Shial Kanta. We know 

 that this has been carried to such a length in Europe that naturalists are now much 

 occupied in divesting publisher's pictures of their artistical improvements, by refer- 

 ring back to the original drawings, however faulty these may be in many points. 



2. We have rarely, if ever first rate sketches or drawings in India, though we often 

 have them good, and spirited, and conveying a vivid idea of the place, plant or animal, 

 &c. and we have sometimes the advantage of having the naturalist on the spot to correct 

 his own work* or shew the artist how far he may do it for him. By sending to Eu- 

 rope we at once lose this important advantage. 



3. If we had always first rate drawings we might perhaps with truth say we could 

 not do justice to them. But I submit that, hitherto, we have most certainly given 

 most accurate copies of what we had to copy from f and that the question is really, 

 situated as the Society is, not if we can give first rate work, but if we can give five 

 hundred exact copies of the works put into our hands : 1 do not allude here of course to 

 the cheapness or dearness, distance, loss of time, risks of loss, (or must we keep dupli- 

 cates ?) &c. &c. &. 



4. Again. The Society is always in trust for these matters. Are we justified, I 

 should ask, in trusting out of our safe custody the labours of others ? And this in the 

 face of the many reports which we hear of the eager rivalities of European naturalists ? 

 How could the Society for instance send Dr. Cantor's Chusan drawings or those of 

 Burnes, &c. to Europe ? 



5. As far as I am concerned it would be a great load of work taken off my file, for 

 you know what artists, and printers, and authors here are ; so that I am really interest- 

 ed that all the work should be sent to England ! 



6. I venture then to request of you, for I think it will assist the Committee in form- 

 ing their judgment, to circulate with Major Jervis' proposal, the following copies with 

 originals, which are in various styles, and which have not yet been seen together by 

 the Committee. 



The Burnes' drawings have already been exhibited, and as coloured lithographs 

 have been pronounced most creditable work, and most faithful copies. 

 European Artist S *' ^ r ' Griffith's Botanical plates to Cantor's Chusan Zoology, 4 

 Mr. Bennet, £ 2 pjate L of Df C a ntor > s Chusan Zoology, Vespertilo irretitus. 



Native Artist, .. 3. Lt. Yule's two Kasia Hill drawings. 



Mr. r °Bennetf rtlS . t .' * 4# A jaw and teeth from Dr " Spilsbury's Fossils. 

 Native Artist, .. 5. Siamese Emperor, Col. Lowe, 2 drawings. 

 7th December, 1844. H. Piddington, 



Sub-Secretary, <$rc 



* As in the case of Dr. Griffith with his Botanical Plates to Cantor's Chusan Zoology. See sub- 

 sequently his letter. 



