|401|
THE Moniteur of the 11th contains a long letter to the Editor fromMr. De Humboldt, in which he brings a charge of plagiarism againstMr. Arrowsmith, a well-known English geographer.
After some prefatory observations, Mr. De H. proceeds as follows:—
“I was engaged during four years in the construction of a map ofMexico, which was published at Paris, in September, 1809, on two largesheets, in my ‘Geographical and Physical Atlas of the Kingdom of NewSpain.’ I had first drawn it up in Mexico, in 1803, and it was engraved atParis by MM. Aubert and Barriere: it was entitled, ‘General Map ofthe Kingdom of New Spain, drawn up from astronomical observations, andthe whole of the materials which existed in Mexico, at the commencementof the year 1804, by Alexander De Humboldt.’ The astronomical obser-vations, the geodesic surveys, and the barometrical admeasurements ofheights which I made in the course of my travels in the equinoctial regionsof the new Continent, from 1799 to 1803, are to be found in the secondvolume of my ‘Collection of Astronomical Observations,’ published con-jointly with M. Oltmanns. The numerous and unpublished materials whichassisted in the construction of the 20 maps contained in the Mexican atlas,are indicated and discussed in an analysis prefixed to my Political Essay onthe kingdom of New Spain.
“All these long and painful labours, however imperfect they appear tome, Mr. Arrowsmith has entirely appropriated to himself; he faithfullycopied my general map of Mexico, and published it in London, before theappearance of the English translation of my Political Essay; and he sub-
|402| stituted his own name instead of mine, under the title of ‘New Map ofMexico, compiled from original documents, by Arrowsmith.’ The positionsof the towns, of the villages and mines, the boundaries of the intendan-ces, the ranges of mountains, the indications of the heights in toises, thenotes on the migrations of the Azteques, and on the history of navigation,the small arrows annexed to a number of rivers, every thing, in short, is tobe found in the copy of Mr. Arrowsmith. I was obliged to employ severalnew signs, for instance, two hammers placed crosswise to denote the chiefstation of a provincial council of the mines; and Mr. Arrowsmith, in adopt-ing my signs, has also adopted their explanation; he has copied withouttranslating, and without changing a single word; on his English map hehas engraved my explanations in French, always leaving out the signpointing to the places where I made astronomical observations. If myname is looked for in the copy of the great map, it is only to be found inone of the three squares which contain the same number of sketches bor-rowed from my Mexican Atlas. These small squares present hydrographicplans of the ports of Vera-Cruz and Acapulco, and the chart of the valleyof Mexico. To the words ‘Valley of Mexico,’ Mr. Arrowsmith hasthought fit to annex the following words, ‘from Mr. Humboldt’s Map.’But the only thing which Mr. Arrowsmith chooses to ascribe to me is notmy own: it was a plan drawn up by Don Louis Martin, in 1804.”
After a variety of other observations, Mr. De Humboldt adds: “Thissilence with regard to the sources of their information is become too com-mon with geographers; particularly with those who do not accompany theirmaps with analytical memoirs on the subject of their construction, thougha very different example has been given by the most distinguished of thatclass of literary men, such as d’Anville, Dalrymple, Fleurieu, and Rennell.”
Mr. de H. concludes with expressing his hope, that the reclamations of atraveller will meet with some attention, when he proves that mere copiesof his labours are disseminated under the name of another person. Theletter itself is written with every appearance of candor, and deserves theattention of those whom it may concern.
