1 800, ]: 
To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine. 
SIR, 
W AS very pleafingly furprifed by the 
I difcovery of the knowledge of the 
principle of preparing the American cake, 
mentioned in one of your preceding Maga- 
gines, amongft the Moors in Barbary. 
As I have not the book in my poffeffion, 
I mut prefent you with the fubftance of 
the account, as it is related by Harmer: 
‘* A ta-jen,”’ according to Dr. Shaw, 
* ferves for a frying-pan, as well as for a 
baking-veffel; for (he fays) the bagreah 
of the people of Barbary differs not much 
from our pancakes, only that, inftead of 
rubbing the ta-jen or pan, in which they 
fry them, with butter, they rab it with 
Soap, to make them honey-comb.”” Harmer, 
vol. i. p.235. Shaw, notei. p. 230. 
A correfpondent has obferved, that 
amongft the ufes of oil, which you had 
enumerated, that of deftroying infeéts had 
been omitted. This ufe was well known 
to Pliny, who mentions itin thefe words : 
¢ Oleo quidem non apes tantum fed omnia in- 
JeGia examinantur, pracipue fi capite uno ia fole 
ponantur.” NN. H. lib. ii. c. 19. 
If it fhould be afked, what Pliny under- 
ftood by infeéts, we cannot have a more 
beautiful drawing than the following paf- 
face: ‘* Et jure omnia infeéta appellata 
ab incifuris, que nunc cervicum loco, nunc 
pectorumatq. alvipracintia feparant mem- 
bra, tenui modo fitula coherentia. Lib. i. 
cap. 1.” 
To conclude this mifcellaneous article, 
by an inquiry {till more remote, I fhould 
be much obliged, if any of your corre- 
fpondents would favour me with the title 
of the beft French and German Grammar 
and Dictionary. Iam, Sir, 
Your’s, &c. 
ANTIQUARIAN. 
—=—Ps— 
Zo the Editor of the Monthly Magazine. 
SIR, 
N your well-conduéted mifcellany there 
| appeared, a few months ago, an ex- 
cellent paper on the fubje&t of REVIEWS. 
I with the writers in thefe monthly publi- 
cations would attend to the hints there 
fuggefted, efpecially in their accounts of 
theolagical pieces; with refpeét to which, 
T have long ob(erved a fhameful neglect, and 
culpable partiality. Two inftances have 
lately ftruck me as very remarkable, on 
which I think you would be ferving the 
public to infert a brief animadverfion. 
One Review, in noticing Williams’s An- 
fwer to Belfham’s Letters to Wilberforce, 
inftead of giving a view of that publicae 
MONTHLY MAG. NO. 57. 
J 
Partiality of Reviews.—Relicf of the Poor. 
24 
tion, takes occafion to colleét from it a 
ftring of Mr. Belfham’s affertions, and to 
reprobate him, as having ‘* out. pained 
Paine himfelf,’’ and even to call forth the 
arm of power to filence him as a public 
teacher, and to prevent his conduéting the 
education of youth ! 
On the other hand, another Review, in 
noticing Palmer’s Apology forthe Sabbath, 
which was written partly againft Belfham, 
inftead of prefenting the reader with a view 
of its contents, profefles to anfwer 
the book, by remarking upon fome 
_ of the moft doubtful arguments ina ftrain 
of ridicule, without even mentioning thofe 
on which the controverfy chiefly hinges. 
Had I not read the traét, I fhould have 
fuppofed the writer had not faid a word 
to prove that the fabbath was not a 
mere Fewi/h rite, but inftituted before the 
Mofaic ceconomy took place, and of uni- 
verfal, and therefore perpetual, obligatien. 
This, however, is a leading object. Such 
conduct on either fide is unfair and une 
juft. But how are authors to obtain re< 
drefs? Reviewers will feldom admit their 
defence, and will always have the laft 
word. Ithink, Sir, there ought to be a 
court of appeal; and I know none fitter 
than your Magazine, in winch you have 
manifefted your love of 
IMPARTIALITY, 
———- 
To the Editor of the Monthly Magazines 
SIR, 
OC). of your correfpondents, who, un- 
der the fignature B. A. (p. 128), 
offers fome fuggeltions refpeéting benefit 
focieties, remarks, that from the prefent 
price of the neceffaries of life moft, of the 
poor can {pare nothing from their earnings» 
The truth of this obfervyation, which is 
fatal to the inftitutions he wifhes to re- 
commend, is too notorious to be doubted 
by any one the leaft converfant with the 
prefent ftate of the labouring poor ; indeed 
we muft rather be furprifed, how, under 
the enormous rife that has taken place on 
all the moft effential articles of con!*np- 
tion, fuch of the poor as have families in 
particular, can poffibly contrive to fubfift 
on their earnings, which, I believe, the 
majority would find utterly impracticable, 
without the aid of the many charities 
which have lately been inftituted for theic 
relief. To the promoters of thefe infti- 
tutions every commendation is due for 
their intentions, and in many inftances for 
their judgment and ufefulnefs in the mode 
of relief ; but it is a truth which ought 
to be ferioufly confidered, that the necef- 
Li fity 

SB Lae Ee ad 
