6 
Infcription on the Babylonian Bricks. 
(Aug. 2 
A VIEW, joewing the FACE of a BRICK. All the BRICKS are ‘compofed of a YEL- 
LOWIsH CLAY, fomenvhat redder in the Center, and they are in Thicknefs three 
Inches, and in Length and Breadth between 12 and 14 Inches. : 
Se = 
— 
= 
SS 
= SSS an 
P.S. Mr. Montucci, Occafional Chineje 
Vranfcriber, has publifhed propofals for a 
work on the Charaéeriftic Merits of the 
Chinefe Language, the title of which he 
has iurrounded with Chinefe characters, 
apparently to make a captivating fhew of. 
his learning, but which, -however, more 
decidedly proves him to be merely what 
he ftyles himfelf, ‘ Az Occafonal Tran- 
feriber.” The upper line of thefe charac- 
ters he has tranfcribed from a work pub- 
lifhed in England above-thirty years fince, 
namely, the fifty-ninth Vol. of the Philofiph. 
Tranfa@. Table XX1. line the 4th. 
The characters of the bottom line: he' 
has traufcribed from Table XXIII. line 
Gih, of the fame volume, where they 
occur in exadtly the fame order. 
_ As to the two perpendicular columns, 
the one 1s tranfcribed from the other. 
His Chinefe motto—Ba0ks do net exhauft 
avords—words do ntt exhauf? ideas, he has 
tranfaibed from p..323, of the firft -vo- 
lume ofthe Memoirs ‘of the Miffienaries 
of Peking, whefe it is apptied by Father 
Amiot to enforce the obfervation, that 
men of merit are fometimes flandered by 
ebfcure and bafe mifcreants. <‘* [ am 
aware (fays he) that the approbation of 
# 
the truly learned and refpeétable is thei 
fecurity, but a Miffionary, neverthelefg, 
has the difpleafure to fee himfelf quoted 
in works of ignorance and falfehood; for 
books do not exbauft words—vords do not 
exhauft ideas.” . i. 
Thus then has thisOccafonal Tranferiber 
had the moal-adroitnefs of applying to 
another that which fo aptly applies to 
himielf. | | 
The Englifh reader fhould befides 
know, that, in all the fifteen gto volumes 
of the Memoirs of the Miffionaries of 
Peking, this is the only fentence exprefled 
in Chinefe charaéters. Is it not fair to 
conclude, that this critic, diftveffed for a . 
motto on this occafion, was compelled to 
tranfcrive, not being able “to find an ori- 
ginal motto adapted to his. purpoie in the 
many Chinefe books in Europe, which 
every where abound with fuch apothegms? 
Ought he not, at leaf, to have cited the 
author of his motto? Thus whilft this 
gentleman prefumes to freat others only as 
imatterers in Chinefe, he feems to prove 
himfelf, by the very title of his work, to 
be nothing but a literary plagiary, and 
a fervile Tranfcriber ! 
Fuly 11,1801. j. 
‘Lo, 
