part 2

francs, only 10 published.

(VI.)—_Appendice aux éditions des œuvres de Voltaire._ (Half-title.) _Bibliographie Voltairienne. (allegorical cut.) Paris. Firmin Didot and Daguin frères. [1842] 8ᵛᵒ; xxxvi. 184. Dedicated to M. Poltoratzky._ Double columns, small type. Only 250 copies printed. Reprint from _La France Littéraire_, with additions and an introduction by Aubert de Vitry, on Voltaire’s influence on the XVIII. century. Quérard declares that though this occupied him a year, little of it is his own. He is indebted to Barbier, Peignot, &c., and to the editors of Voltaire’s works, Kehl, and particularly Beuchot. There are 1131 articles, and 4 Indexes (pp. 162-183).

(VII.)—_La Littérature Française contemporaine. XIXᵉ siècle. Renferment: 1ᵒ Par ordre alphabétique de noms d’auteurs, l’indication chronologique des publications originales des écrivains français régnicoles et étrangers, et celle des éditions et traductions françaises des ouvrages des auteurs étrangers, vivants, imprimés en France pour la première fois depuis le commencement de ce siècle; 2ᵒ Une table des livres anonymes et polyonymes qui, par leurs publications appartiennent à cette époque; 3ᵒ Une tables des sujets. Le tout accompagné de notes Biographiques et Littéraires. Tome premier. Paris. Daguin Frères, éditeurs. Quai Malaquais, 7, 1842; 8ᵛᵒ; xiv. 631._ Double columns. The second volume has the title-page somewhat altered. L. L. F. C. 1827-1844. _Renfermant: 1ᵒ Par ordre alphabétique de noms d’auteurs l’indication des ouvrages français et étrangers publiés en France et celle des ouvrages française publiés à l’étranger; 2ᵒ une table des livres anonymes et polyonymes; 3ᵒ une table générale méthodique. Le tout accompagné de Biographies et de Notes historiques et littéraires. Par M. M. Charles Louandre et Félix Bourquelot. Paris, &c. 1846._ And on the reverse of the title-page, “_La Rédaction de ce volume appartient, jusqu’à la page 282 à M. Quérard_.” (When about one-third of the article on Napoleon Bonaparte was written.) The volume contains 636 pages. The title-pages of the subsequent volumes are also altered, but with this we are not concerned. The author was deprived of all his right with regard to this book by the publisher, when the names of 600 subscribers had been obtained. The pretext being that the author was not supplying copy sufficiently fast, and that besides the length of the biographies would have enlarged the work beyond the 3 vols. promised in the prospectus.[6]

An arbitration took place in June 1844, composed of M. F. Daguin and his cousin and creditor M. Audot, on the one side, and the estimable and much esteemed M. Aimé André, in the absence of the person principally interested on the other. The award was in favor of the publisher, that he had sole right in the work, and Quérard was condemned in the costs of the arbitration. From the time of the deprivation of his rights of authorship, he never ceased to point out the negligence, the slips, the gross blunders, and the ignorance shewn by the men who had dared to continue his work. These gentlemen however considered him in the wrong, and bitterly complain of the continual attacks Quérard made on them. On the other hand, Quérard very justly complained that it was not the names of the gentlemen who continued his _Littéraire Française contemporaine_ that mulcted the subscribers, nor was it the publishers; but it was his own unfortunate name which had originally inspired the subscribers with the confidence that caused them to subscribe, and ultimately to become compulsory victims of a purely mercantile speculation. We have carefully perused the correspondence in this quarrel, and we think there was not the least moral justification for depriving Quérard of his work. It was a fraud upon the subscribers: it was a fraud upon him, by putting his name to a publication which he entirely repudiated, which is incorrect, and has in fact all the characteristics of such undertakings, when they have degenerated as we have already said into purely mercantile speculations.[7] Every word of M. Daguin’s defence only brings him deeper into the mire of literary dishonesty. The insolence of this publisher’s letters to a man of science and knowledge is beyond endurance. It is well to let our readers know that he was bankrupt in 1845, and the book went into other hands, though he continued his miserable efforts in endeavouring to answer Quérard’s stinging criticisms.

In the Preface to his Écrivains Pseudonymes, Quérard said that no one up to that time had ventured to praise the continuation of _La Littérature Française contemporaine_.[8] This the publisher indignantly denied, and cited in proof two papers “much esteemed,” _The Athenæum Français_, and _L’Illustration_. M. Daguin could scarcely have taken a more unfortunate instance than that of the _Athenæum Français_,[9] a trade publication, in which the articles on bibliography were written by the friends of the compilers, and which shortly stopped publication.[10] In the course of its existence it did not notice Quérard’s works, and when it did _La Littérature Française contemporaine_, it generally pointed out an error or omission, while it awarded its meed of vacuous praise according to the journalistic formula.

Certainly the French press did not overwhelm him with encouragement. The most notable instance of neglect is that of the _Journal des Savants_. How comes it that the “Savants” have not honored their pages with even the titles of Quérard’s works? when they notice that of M. Brunet. Have two hundred years of existence brought that journal to its dotage? Is it also a trade concern, or is it the property of a clique? If so, the sooner it assumes another title the better. We recommend “Journal du Savon,” as agreeable in sound, and suggestive in title.

Notwithstanding the disastrous result of the award against him, a ray of sunshine illuminated the darkness, and Quérard again hoped that he might continue his labors, when freed from his cares and troubles. A princely stranger from the far North presented himself: passionately fond of French literature, and a no less enthusiastic bibliographer than was the author of _La France Littéraire_ himself—M. Serge Poltoratzky of Moscow. This excellent, noble, and generous man from that time became Quérard’s Mecænas, patronizing all the different publications he engaged in up to the year 1854. He made many sacrifices, which unfortunately did not bear the result, that in the fulness of his heart he wished, namely, the tranquillity of the laborious bibliographer; the works he patronized being only known or required by an exceedingly restricted number, cost so much, and Quérard’s own position was so precarious. The 40 francs a sheet that Messrs. F. Didot allowed him; the 1000 francs a year accorded by the Minister of public instruction; the remittances of M. Poltoratzky; all were absorbed in the preparation of the M.S., and besides all this he was constantly harassed by want. The Parisian booksellers, witnesses of his painful efforts, urged him to make an application direct to the Minister of Public Instruction for a Librarianship, and offered him their utmost support. A petition was accordingly drawn up and subscribed by sixty-six of the principal and most influential publishers and booksellers in Paris. It was seconded by another, signed by five Academicians, who were also librarians, M. M. Naudet, Letronne, Ch. Lenormant, Charles Magnin, and L. Feuillet.

Quérard did not even receive a reply. This was in September 1842. M. Villemain was minister, with M. Désiré Nisard at the head of the division of science and literature. In an unfortunate moment of precipitation, Quérard was guilty of a _lapsus calami_, and this it appears was sufficient to wipe out, in the eyes of this pompous minister, twenty years zealous and laborious study. M. Villemain underlined the fatal word, and, with a superb air of disdain, threw the petition to his clerks, saying:—“That is my answer.”

About the year 1844, Quérard met Mr. Panizzi, (“honorable et savant,” as the former very justly observes.) His works had gained for him the good-will of Mr. Panizzi, who wishing to give him a proof of his respect, proposed him as a proper person for a post in the Library of the British Museum. However, in spite of the cordial feelings which then prevailed between France and England, Quérard was rejected because he was a Frenchman.[11] Whether we, or he lost most by this, it is difficult to say. The men at the head of the only national institution an Englishman can be proud of, having, fortunately, been the right men in the right place, but it would have been an honorable and gracious act on our part, and one which would have reflected lasting credit on us, that the merit and talent of a son of France, disregarded by his own government, should have been appreciated by England. Our bibliographer bore this refusal in mind, who indeed would not have done so, and when in May and July the “Sydenham Society” made a proposal to him, to undertake the important catalogue of their medical works in the French language, flattering as it was, he did not accept it.

(VIII.)—_Le Moniteur de la Librairie, mémorial universel des publications françaises et étrangères anciennes et modernes, rédacteur en chef. M. J.-M. Quérard. 1844; 8ᵛᵒ._ Was published the 10th, 15th, and 20th, of each month. Founded on the plan of the _Bibliologue_. First edited by Paul Colomb. Nos. 5 and 6, February 1844, contain an excellent article by S.-Marie Guichard, on _La Littérature française contemporaine_, and the _Manuel du Libraire_ of Brunet. The immense labor of Quérard is praised as it merits. M. Brunet is also treated as a bibliographer of the first class, but it is justly remarked that the vice of his system is in the nature of all select bibliographies.[12]

(IX.)—_Le Bibliothécaire. Archives d’histoire littéraire de biographie, de bibliologie et de bibliographie redigée, par M. M. Mécène, [Serge Poltoratzky,] et Photius. [J.-M. Q.] No. 1, Juillet 1844. Paris, rue Jacob, No. 33. 1844; 8ᵛᵒ; 64._ Only one number published, and an extract of the 2nd, a notice of J.-P.-J. Arcet. 1844; 8ᵛᵒ; 39. Very little known, as only 100 copies were printed.

The authors of this Journal wish to raise the literature of bibliography from its present debased condition in France.[13]

(X.)—_Les auteurs déguisés de la littérature française au XIXᵉ siècle. Essai bibliographique pour servir de Supplément aux recherches d’A. A. Barbier, sur les ouvrages pseudonymes. Par J.-M. Q. (allegorical cut.) Paris, au bureau du “Bibliothécaire.” 1845; 8ᵛᵒ; 84._

This was merely written as a specimen of the _Supercheries_. It is of little value at present.[14] There is an excellent article upon it in the “National” for 1844, by Old Nick.[15] [Forgues] almost entirely reprinted in the introduction to the _Supercheries_; and one by the Marquess of Foudras, in the “Quotidienne” of August 1846. See No. XVII.

“Vanity, modesty, malice, mischievousness, cowardice, fear, cupidity, are the causes of these different disguises.”[16]

Quérard also thought of publishing a continuation of the _Bibliothèque Historique de la France_ of Lelong, but he never did,[17] which is perhaps not to be regretted.

(XI.)—_Plaidoyer par M. J.-M. Quérard contre M. M. Daguin frères prononcé par Mᵉ. Nibelle devant la cour royale de Paris, chambres des vacations, audience du mercredi 22 Octobre 1845, avec des pièces justificatives et des notes. Paris, rue Mazarine No. 60, 6 août. 1846._[18] A pamphlet.

(XII.)—_Dictionnaire des ouvrages Polyonymes et Anonymes de la Littérature Française, 1700-1845. Publié sous les auspices d’un Bibliophile étranger [M. Serge Poltoratzky]. Paris. L’Éditeur, rue Mazarine, Nos. 60-62, 1846_; 240; 3 parts only published, pp. 80 each 2 fr. L. P. copies 4 fr. From A (Auguste Barbier) to Almanach Musicale, in all 2673 articles. The cover is the only title-page, and it is the same as _La France Littéraire_, with the above additions. “Arises” in the motto without the final “s.” Quérard’s very numerous coadjutors in this work, and criticisms, will be found in (XVII). The publication was suspended by the Revolution.

“M. Quérard is the most intrepid expositor of literary frauds and dodges known. We cannot understand that the life of one man would be sufficient to arrange so many titles, to see through so many mysteries, to baffle so many precautions and artifices, and yet M. Quérard is still a young man.”[19] This part is valuable for the articles Académie and Almanack, if for no others.

When are we to have a Dictionary of English anonyms, and Pseudonyms? We put the two together because those who have treated of one, have generally of the other. We have heard that Mr. Halkett is going to supply these desiderata, if so we trust he will be induced to hasten his labor. Such a work correctly executed—and corrected for the press, with the utmost precision—will be a boon, and make a lasting reputation for its author.[20] We are confident however that it cannot possibly approach completeness without a search through the British Museum catalogues. No work of the kind could be, without going through this most stupendous bibliographical monument, which for correctness and knowledge, is quite beyond the comprehension of any but those who are well acquainted with it. We do not pretend that it has not defects; it has some very grave ones, both of general arrangement, and minute detail. In the former what we most complain of is the alphabetical order of the title-pages. This is a great deformity, which we hope will be remedied, if the catalogue is ever printed, no matter how great the labor. It is productive of the greatest anachronisms. Thus “Waverley” which is Sir Walter Scott’s earliest production, comes last in the list. The facility for reference that the old catalogue possesses over the new in this respect is very great. The eye runs down dates almost without effort, but if the title has to be followed it must be read. It is easier to remember the date of a book, than its alphabetical title. An understanding of the system of cataloguing would be greatly aided by the rules being printed on a card, after the manner of the “plan” of the Reading Room.

Notwithstanding its many shortcomings taken as a whole it is an extraordinary, and unprecedented work,[21] but for which we should have to cede the palm of fine catalogues to the Americans, who are following in the wake of the Germans, by whom it is justly considered that a man of talent is the most proper Librarian. At present the post of Librarian is so ridiculously remunerated in most of our Libraries, that no man of standing could think of accepting it, and indeed so little do English people as a rule consider this necessary that they would not think of employing a man of talent. The situations of organist and librarian, are most _honorable_ posts for professional men; and paid much on the same principles.

In 1847 M. J.-C. Brunet was decorated with the cross of the Legion of Honor for his _Manuel du Libraire_. The subject of this biography considered that his work was of more importance to the history of French Literature than the _Manuel_, and at least merited the same reward. Englishmen are aware what store is set by our sprightly neighbours upon this cross, and though we laugh at the effect, we cannot but reverence the feelings which prompt the desire for its acquisition. He accordingly wrote to M. Salvandy with the recommendations of two influential persons to support his request. M. Salvandy was more polite than M. Villemain had been in the year 1842. More polite!—He answered, but what an answer:—

Monsieur,

J’ai reçu la lettre que vous m’avez fait l’honneur de m’écrire pour m’exposer vos titres à la décoration de la Légion d’honneur. J’ai fait prendre note de votre demande, que j’examinerai lors du prochain travail des promotions avec tout l’intérêt qui s’attache aux honorables recommendations dont elle est appuyée.

24 Juin, 1847.

They could not spare this order of distinction for a work of twenty years, which is used as a guide to French Literature throughout the civilized world, but they would recollect the two honorable recommendations by which the request was supported.

The third great work Quérard published is entitled:—

(XIII.)—_Les Supercheries Littéraires Dévoilées. Galerie des Auteurs apocryphes, supposés, déguisés, plagiaires et des éditeurs infidèles de la Littérature Française pendant les quatre derniers siècles; ensemble les industriels littéraires et des lettrés qui se sont anoblis à notre époque. Par M. J.-M. Q. Paris, L’Éditeur, Rue Mazarine, 60 et 62, 1847; cxlviii. 600; corrections 600-604. Vol. II. 639; corrections 639-650. Vol. III. Paris, L’Éditeur, Rue de Seine, 62. 1850; 614. Notice des travaux Bibliographiques de M. J.-M. Q. de Rennes (Ille-et-Vilaine) (né le 25 Décembre 1797) avec les jugements portés par les critiques._ 1850; 32; bound up at the end of this volume, also published separately. (See XVII.) _Vol. IV. Paris, L’Éditeur, Rue de Seine 36. 1852; 668. Vol. V._ 1853-4; 410. The asterisms begin in this volume, and occupy 72 pages. Then the index of Authors’ names. There are 9430 articles in the work. The covers of the parts of all Quérard’s works should be bound up with them. Published in parts at 2 francs 25 cent. pp. 80 each. The dedication is “A. M. Wohlthætter, M. S. P. S. M.” ami éclairé des lettres et savant bibliographe; _i.e._ A M[on] Wohlthætter (German for “bienfaiteur”) M. S[erge] P[oltoratzky] S[eigneur] M[oscovite], to whom not only the publication of the work, but many of the articles were due.

Here is a title which promises some interesting revelations, and alone seems to contain the scandalous chronicle of French Literature, already a pamphlet on the same subject has been eagerly bought up. No. IX.[22]

M. Quérard is a hunter, whose malice equals his courage, and who is served by talented and learned correspondents, well versed in all the little scandals of Literature. The result of this concatenation, is a book which makes a “bruit d’enfer,” in which all the celebrities of the pen are unmasked. Where all the dodges of pride or cupidity are exposed.[23]

M. Quérard’s thirst for literary truth is inexhaustible, and if he could not speak to the public he would go like a certain mythological personage and reveal to the earth in default of auditors, that Midas had asses ears, or rather borrowed ears.[24]

As a rule bibliography is a production of the mind too cold and dry to produce even a slight emotion, but this work was a rare exception: it was read, and praised, and abused. So many writers found their works handled rather roughly perhaps but truthfully as a rule. Their pride offended by the exposure of numerous literary frauds, some of little moment, others of magnitude. Their self esteem was touched, and where is an author more susceptible? The malevolence of some of his critics added to the success of the work, which though bibliographical was found interesting and racy, and a second edition was called for immediately, an unprecedented event in the annals of bibliography.

This work singular as it is, is far from being so well known as it should be, because the whole edition is in the libraries of amateurs of bibliographical propensities. It is now very rare and another edition is everywhere called for. Often are amusement and instruction looked for side by side, and on this score few books are so captivating as this fearless compendium of literary frauds discovered. And if this or that name is the object of an accumulation of pages, it is all the more deplorable, because they are true. We must refer the reader to the names of supposed authors. (Having given the titles of several works the critic proceeds to say:)—

This as is apparent is an assemblage of considerable works.

They have not made the fortune of their indefatiguable author; they have only given him renown, with a certain number who appreciate the difficulty and the range of such a work and who are astonished that one man, who has been able to execute them, does not occupy a high position in our National Library. That which M. Quérard has experienced is the inevitable misfortune which attaches to all who attempt to disseminate truth. And in fact his numerous works demand from their merits, a kind of implacability, it was necessary to say all. He has made numerous and powerful enemies. It was for the public to compensate him, as it was to enlighten and instruct the public that this pitiless, and too precise bibliographer encountered the hatred which is the cause of his poverty. I nevertheless doubt, even if he could begin his career anew, with a fore-knowledge of all the dangers of truthfulness before him, whether a man of his stamp of integrity would be able to allow himself to make the least concession to pride, were it even to those men who vote at the “Palais Mazarin”! M. Quérard is of a family of incorrigibles and truth is his idol.[25]

“The title alone of this book promises a great scandal: the most interesting revelations. What a bait for malignity! What attraction for legitimate curiosity! There are some articles in it which of themselves would make the reputation of any book, such as the long notice of Cagliostro where M. de Courchamp is so severely treated, and that on Catherine, the great Catherine, she whom Voltaire, Diderot and d’Alembert, whom the prince de Ligne called “Catherine the great,” and whom M. P. R. A.-S the coadjutor of M. Quérard successively strips of all the literary titles by which she was gratified; and even of the familiar letters leaving her nothing in French, but an incorrect and barbarous style devoid of talent, wit, or understanding.”[26]

The original title of this work was _Les Auteurs &c._[27] _Les Supercheries Littéraires Dévoilées_ was added on the cover to the third part and afterwards to the title-page.

“As will be seen M. Quérard has changed the title (during publication) and made it even a little more satirical than it was before.”[28] But the principal articles from which a book might be composed is devoted to M. Alexandre Dumas. One of M. Quérard’s coadjutors[29] has nurtured this article with affection or rather with ingenious and indefatigable hatred. We cannot but deplore that a talented writer should so often allow himself to overlook the dictates of delicacy, and be led away by the ardour of his unexampled industry. We ought to say that the article in which M. Dumas is placed, as if upon his trial, breathes a tone that should render the most legitimate criticism suspicious. The articles of accusation begin at page 404, and end at 480. “This only embraces the dramatic pieces of the accused, or rather the condemned one. The novels come next, and heaven knows what that promises.[30] In this part, the critic who has taken charge of M. Alexandre Dumas finishes with a furious and unparalleled slaughter; he gives the last blows with a sledge hammer. No doubt M. Dumas will not die of the effects; he will only come out bruised and scratched; but the knowing reader will have had his laugh, and that is a great point in this “vale of tears.” In running over the other articles, we do not recover from our surprise when we find M. Quérard well posted up in so many intrigues, initiated in so many mysteries and artifices. He is as terrible as remorse, and formidable as conscience. The preliminary discourse upon literary frauds ancient and modern is equally full of singular and curious incidents.”[31]

It has lately been said, but we do not believe it, that the author of that terrible pamphlet against Alexandre Dumas in the SUPERCHERIES is chiefly the work of Signor Florentino, who is supposed to be one of the coadjutors of the celebrated dramatist-novelist, and who says he is author of the first part of Monte Christo. One thing which no one can explain astonishes us; that of all the writers who pretend to have so nobly sold their genius to Alexandre Dumas, there is not one who has been able to write a line for his own profit which anyone will buy.[32]

In the notice on the death of Louis Philippe, King of the French, some observations will be found on Quérard’s in the SUPERCHERIES.[33]

The name of Quérard, already of European reputation by his numerous writings, will one day be graven in letters of gold over the portals of every library in the French dominions, as that of the most faithful guide of the librarian devoted to the study of French Literature.[34]

An article in _La Silhouette_ for 30 January 1848, signed “Le Rat,” (_Pseud._ Auguste Vitu) imputed numerous errors to Quérard, and at the word “Rat,” in _Les Supercheries_, he reprints the article, and convicts the “Rat” of numerous errors and shows that he was right. We however cannot but consider that a work like this is not the place for a discussion, which certainly should not have occupied its pages, and doubtless in the second edition all such blemishes as these would have been removed. The Baron de Reiffenberg, though a great friend and coadjutor of Quérard, having contributed many articles to the _Supercheries_, is exposed like all the rest. Quérard says that he much regrets the task imposed upon him, but he should lose the good opinion of the shade of the Baron, if he were not conscientiously to carry out the article. No doubt if the Baron had been alive this article would have been just the same, though at the risk of losing one of his best friends.

The article on Alexandre Dumas, occupying 170 octavo pages, contains the most extraordinary disclosures of literary frauds and peccadillos ever exposed in any nation or in any age. By this article it seems that M. Alexandre Dumas has committed every imaginable literary fraud, and a great many unimaginable ones. This is only a sample, the book from beginning to end is the same, only every one it exposes or discloses is not of such world-wide renown.

In a note at p. 483, we learn that Thackeray concerned himself about M. Dumas and the length of French novels, which he satirically wishes would never end. Almost as a fulfilment of his wish M. Dumas published _Les Mémoires d’un Médecin_, which the circulating libraries announced would be in 80 volumes.[35]

Here we find that those extraordinary and popular works _Les Trois Mousquetaires_, _Vingt ans après_, _&c._, are not written by Alexandre Dumas, and much other interesting information relative to the works themselves. But disappointment borders on disgust when we learn that we have been cheated into thanking M. Dumas for _Monte Christo_.

An Index to the Article is given, and one of authors “whom M. Dumas has snatched from bad society to introduce into good;” in all 73.

Quérard began the second edition, under the following title:—_Les Supercheries L. D. G. des E. F. de toute l’Europe qui se sont déguisés sous des anagrammes, des astéronymes, des boustrophédons, des criptonymes, des initialismes, des noms littéraires, des pseudonymes facétieux et bizarres, etc., découverts ou non; des auteurs apocryphes, etc. Précédé d’un introduction intitulée “Des Supercheries littéraire anciennes et moderne, plus particulièrement en France.” Par &c. avec le concours de bibliothécaires et bibliophile Français Belges, Suisses, etc._ But death carried him off when the first part only was published. The articles instead of 9430 would have been about 30,000.[36]

There is probably no necessity for a work on literary frauds in so caustic a style as Quérard’s, but that there is ample scope for such a work in English literature there cannot be the least doubt. Some of our pseudonyms are the most grotesque, some are harmless, some absurd, and some infamous.[37]

We trust that the second edition of the Supercheries will be taken up by one of France’s numerous talented bibliographers. But do not let it be an expurgated edition; if there are passages which the editor might think would be better softened down let him not touch it. Let Quérard speak. The editing should be confined to revision and correction. The reflections in the second cannot be more severe than in the first edition, and the worst complaint he had was only that of a second-rate writer, who said that Quérard had falsely ascribed a pseudonym to him, which was partly true. Quérard himself says:—“_L’Auteur tenait beaucoup, et non sans raison, à publier lui-même ses matériaux si laborieusement rassemblés, et, qui pouvaient plus tard tomber en des mains étrangères à la science de toute sa vie qui n’hésiteraient pourtant point à les éditer, malgré la conviction de n’y rien entendre, si nous pouvons en juger par ce qui se passe journellement sous nos yeux._”[38]

So entirely was he absorbed by his laborious studies that our learned bibliographer never gave his own interests present or future a passing thought, so that from the time when he first made known his talents to the world in 1827, up to the date of his death he was constantly in a most precarious position. The years 1845 and 1854 were worse than any others.

In 1845, the brothers Daguin, publishers of the _Littérature Française contemporaine_, bought a number of French classics, expurgated in favor of the methodist protestants, which swallowed up the capital their father had left them two years before. One of them seeing that the bankruptcy of the firm was imminent (it effectually disappeared the same year) put himself in a position to continue the _Littérature contemp._, though without the slightest knowledge or preparatory study, required for such a work, of which in fact he was only the publisher. The agreement Quérard had made with him in good faith, but which was only an extract of one Messrs. Didot had imposed upon him, received a most perfidious interpretation, as we have seen above, for the author was unjustly though legally deprived of the result of his own labors: of the emanation of his brain. He appealed, but only made the case worse, the judges confirmed the award of the arbitrator, and mulcted him not only in damages and interest, but in the costs with a stipulation that he was to be arrested if he did not pay. M. F. Daguin desirous that every one should know the sort of man he was, pressed Quérard with unheard of severity, and pushed his barbarity so far as to get him condemned to five years imprisonment at Clichy. Luckily the information had been improperly laid; there was a flaw in the instructions, and Quérard was freed after _only_ three months imprisonment. But he had to pay this man who had deprived him of his means of living, 1600 francs, more than he received for editing a volume and a half of his work. The cowardly indignities of the publisher, who in one of his letters has the impudent hypocrisy to say that he had been lenient with Quérard, and had not prosecuted him to the utmost rigor of the law, did not cease there. Knowing that he had effectually deprived our bibliographer of every means of establishing his rights, he put the finishing stroke to his perfidy. In the preface of Vol. VI. of _La France Littéraire_, Quérard promised a supplement to that work when finished, to include all additions and corrections, from 1700 to 1842. To deprive him of this resource, the publisher no sooner possessed himself of _La Litt. Française Contemporaine_ than he altered its plan, and introduced additions which _were totally out of place_. Then the _Supercheries_ and the XI. Vol. of _La France Littéraire_ appeared, and as each new part was published, so was it pillaged to ameliorate and supply the defects of the publisher’s book. Thus nearly 1200 articles whether belonging to the original plan or not of _La Littérature contemporaine_ were stolen from the former to enrich the latter. The only answer to the author’s complaints was that “_Les Supercheries_ of Quérard belonged to everybody!”

_Un Feuillet pour les Supercheries littéraires dévoilées de Quérard; par S. P. Y. de Moscou_ [_Serge Poltoratzky_] _et J.-M. Quérard_. In _Bibliographie de la France, XXXVII. année. Paris. Pillet aîné, 1848._ 8ᵛᵒ.

(XIV.)—_Bibliographie la Mennaisienne. Notice Bibliographique des ouvrages de M. de la Mennais, de leurs réfutations, de leurs apologies, et des biographes de cet écrivain. Troisième édition augmenté. 1850; 2 fr. 50 c. (1st ed. 1849; 149.)_

This pamphlet was extracted from the SUPERCHERIES, with additions.

The Biographie La Mennaisienne presents a lamentable spectacle. We have a Priest, first orthodox, then sincere, and anon gradually inclining towards apostacy and impiety, choked with pride and spleen, up to the very day when the verse of Tartuffe could be applied to him:—

“Voilà je vous l’avoue, un abominable homme.”[39]

(XV.)—_Omissions et bévues du livre intitulé “La Littérature Française Contemporaine,” par M. M. Louandre et F. Bourquelot, ou Correctif de cet ouvrage, avec cette épigraphe: Male parta, male dilabuntur. (Première livraison). (Bon.-Chr.)_ 1848, 8ᵛᵒ.; _xx._ 33, 2 fr.; L. P. 4 fr. Double columns, with two lithographs.

_Réponse aux calomnies que M. Quérard a dirigées contre moi dans son dernier pamphlet intitulé Omissions et bévues de la L. F. C. (signed F. Daguin.) Paris._ 1848; 8ᵛᵒ.

M. Félix Daguin, after having agreed with M. Quérard for the continuation of his FRANCE LITTÉRAIRE broke his agreement without any real (or rather avowable) motive and then obtained the services of M. M. Louandre, and Bourquelot, men of talent. M. Quérard’s absence however very soon became apparent. Everybody had not his intrepid capacity for exploration, nor his incessant desire for exactitude, qualities which no vices of editorship can obscure. M. Quérard attributes the errors in the continuation of his work to the publisher, rather than to the gentlemen who edit it. He takes up the work where he left it, and carries on his revision slowly but surely. The errata of the second volume is perfectly frightful. It is evidence to which there is no reply. To an argument of this kind there is no opposition but silence.[40]

(XVI.)—_Encyclopédie du Bibliothécaire. Prospectus 1850._ Another under this title:—_Encyclopédie du B. de l’homme d’études et du bibliophile Français. Dernier Prospectus—spécimen 1851; r. 8; 24._ We then have 8 pages of the names of 382 subscribers; he had eventually 800, but had determined not to publish under 1000.

This is a work so vast that the life of one man would have been insufficient to execute it unaided. A long list of co-editors is given, comprising all the bibliographical talent of France.

This prospectus suggested M. M. Denis and Pinçon the idea of their very excellent _Nouvel Manuel de Bibliographie Universelle. Paris._ 1857; 8ᵛᵒ. A microscopical miniature of the one Quérard dreamt of, and one day would have published, we believe, had he lived. A comparison with the table of Brunet’s great work will generally prove to the advantage of the former. It was to have been in 15 royal octavo volumes, of about 800 pages each, double columns, with engravings; six specimen portraits are given in this prospectus; each volume 25 francs.

(XVII.)—_Notice des travaux Bibliographiques de M. J.-M. Quérard, de Rennes (Ille-et-Vilaine), (né le 25 Décembre 1797), avec les jugements portés par les critiques._ No title-page. _Paris_, 1850; 32. Includes Nos. II., VII., X., XII., XIII. There are thirteen pages of critiques on this work quoted. XIV., five pages of critiques quoted, and XVI.

(XVIII.)—_Les Plagiats Reiffenbergiens dévoilés. Extrait du tome IV. des “Supercheries Littéraires.” Paris._ 1851; 8ᵛᵒ. 39; 2 francs. Only 50 copies printed.

(XIX.)—_Notice sur les études littéraires, historiques et bibliographiques, de M. Bajot. Paris._ 1852; 8ᵛᵒ.; 16.

(XX.)—_Notice sur M. Serge Poltoratzky bibliophile et bibliographe russe, membre honoraire de la Bibliothèque Impériale publique de Saint-Pétersbourg. Paris, imprimerie de W. Remquet et Cie. successeurs de P. Renouard, rue Garancière, No. 5, Novembre 1854; 20. Signed J.-M. Quérard._ Only 100 copies printed. An extract from Vol. XI. of L. F. L. Not in double columns.

_Moucherat de Longpré. Problème littéraire definitivement résolu en 1854, par M. Quérard._[41] An article upon this subject by that noble-minded Russian, M. Serge Poltoratzky.

In 1854, the son of a man of ninety-three having disputed the right of the author of _Les supercheries littéraires dévoilées_, to extract from the _Moniteur_ of the time a notice of his father, delayed judgment for two years, and prevented the completion of Quérard’s work, and finally imposed upon him the circulation of an extra sheet containing an historical falsehood. Not only was the printing suspended, but the printers who were pestered by the incessant demands of the son, wanted to be rid of so troublesome a customer as Quérard. They therefore required an authority to receive for _three years_ the pension allowed the bibliographer by the minister of public instruction, to cover the expenses of printing which were then due. It was then, when deprived of every means of support, as he had been in 1845, always of course reckoning on the sympathy of his habitual readers, that he founded in 1855 a bibliographical Journal entitled after his own name:—

(XXI.)—_Le Quérard. Archives d’histoire littéraire de biographie et de bibliographie française. Complément périodique de la France littéraire. Par l’auteur de La France Littéraire, des Supercheries Littéraires Dévoilées, etc. etc. (Mottoes:)—Arrière, camarades et ereinteurs; mais à nous les hommes de vrai savoir et de conscience.—Ceci est un livre de bonne foi.—Montaigne. Paris, au bureau du Journal, passage Dauphine, escalier_ H. 1855-6; 8ᵛᵒ; 587—II. 648. The index, pages 645 to 648, vol. II., is frequently wanting. This, unfortunately, turned out another bad speculation for its unlucky editor. An article of several pages is devoted to this journal, in the _Bulletin du Bib. Belge_, XI. 145; 246, XII., 151.

As this work is almost a supplement to his others, and contains some valuable articles not elsewhere, we give a summary:—

Les Bridel, I. 88. by Ph. Bridel.—La Bibliographie devant les Tribunaux M. de Saint-Albin v. Quérard p. 183.—Bibliothèque des frères Gébéodé.—Coup d’œil retrospectif sur le Zombi du Grand-Pérou, p. 187. II: 328. Livres intéressants pour la France dans la Bibliotheca Grenvillana, p. 189. Les Aventures de Faublas, 388. Sur les Mélanges publiés par la Philobiblion Society, London, 374. Remon Sebon, 447. Indiscrétions d’un vieux bibliographe. Additions aux Supercheries Littéraires Dévoilées, 451. Anagramme et Cryptonyme (Blocquel), 553. Du Catalogue Fortsas, 537, & II., 11. Pourquoi une souscription Quérard, 542. Vol. II. Sur la Famille d’Honoré Balzac, 7. Charles Dickens, Fautes d’impressions, 12. Ouvrages de Quérard 49, 643. Etat des livres et des Bibliothèques avant l’invention de l’imprimerie, 45. Recherches sur quelques écrivains ridicules, 1, Pierre le Loyer—2, Ch.-Joseph de Grave, 3, Le P. Maimbourg, 4, Les théologiens jésuites d’Ingolstadt du XVIe siècle, 49. Technologie Bibliographique, ou vocabulaire de la Bibliographie érudite, 154. Feuillets de l’Encyclopédie inédite du Bibliothécaire. Marguerite d’Autriche, Gœthe, 163. France. Academies, 317. Marie Antoinette d’Autriche, 401-479. Charlotte Corday, 440. De Stael, 507. Montaigne. 522. Biographie, Garneau, Historien de Canada, 172. Le Comte Falloux du Coudray, 241. Les contes de Perrault, 251. L. Curmer, 267. De Tribus Impostoribus, 270. “Le Portrait du Loquettes,” 275. H.-L. Wolff de Spa, 275. George de Tours, 301. Bibliothèque de Racine; de Grolier; de Napoleon, 394. Jean Paul Marat, 489. M. Jozon d’Erquar, 488. Les Clubs de Bibliophiles en Angleterre et les bibliothèques particulières de Londres, 550. La Roumanie, 567. La Famille Guizot, 601.[42]

In _Le Quérard_, he seems first to have used the anagram “d’Erquar,” after a capital explanation of his reasons for publishing parts of the _Encyclopédie_. He uses it again (Vol. 2. 488) to supplement the monograph of Charlotte Corday. We fancy we trace Quérard’s style in other articles, and it is probable that he used other signatures; thus he quietly indulged sometimes in a little self-adulation, which did no harm, and was probably a source of considerable amusement and satisfaction to him.

Unfortunately from the first year it had not the success Quérard required to clear him of his embarrassments. This last reverse induced him to make another attempt with the minister of public instruction. M. H. Fortoul, who was fond of, and sympathised with the industrious, received the timid petitioner, who lived only in his study, and who was much disconcerted by his visit to the Minister, with great kindness. M. Fortoul spontaneously suggested to him that his right place was in one of the libraries of Paris, and promised to give it his serious consideration on the first vacancy. But M. H. Fortoul died:[43] there was nobody to keep the promise he had made. Our unfortunate bibliographer had still to wait and still to suffer! And he did. He waited and suffered to the last.[44]

M. Beriat-Saint-Prix had compassion on the unfortunate and precarious position of our bibliographer, and one of the most worthy publishers of Paris, whose father of old had put fortune in Quérard’s way by sending him to Austria as an agent, M. Hector Bossange, took the initiative at the beginning of 1855 of a subscription in favor of him, who for upwards of thirty years rendered a service by his estimable labors, not only to literature, but to the literary establishments of every country, and who was yet left without reward. M. Bossange was fortunate enough to make Messrs. Didot brothers and J.-B Baillière join in his sympathy, and the announcement of the subscription was sent forth. M. Bossange, who from the year 1825 always gave Quérard proofs of his esteem and friendship, put his whole soul and prodigious activity to endeavor to make it a success. Truly never was bibliographer the subject of so flattering an ovation. In this subscription which was only got up with the view of asking the aid of French publishers, librarians joined with bibliophiles and foreign librarians; and in the list of those who gave Quérard evidence of their regard, we read the names of Germans, Americans, Spaniards, English, Belgians, Danes, Italians and Russians. The absence of several names is remarkable. For instance the library of the _Bibliothèque Impériale_ of Paris is not represented by a single man, whilst in this list we read the names of three Librarians of the British Museum,[45] one of the Astor Library of New York, one of Moscow, and several others; this was unpatriotic, and in flagrant bad taste, to a man whose works had frequently assisted their learning when at fault. The name of the author of the “_Manuel du Libraire_” is conspicuous by its absence.

Quérard now thought he was rid of his embarrassments, but he had not reckoned upon that fatality which seemed to attach to him. The subscription was not yet closed when another misfortune struck him. Under the insignificant pretext of a confusion of names, which neither affected his influence nor his interests, a pious writer who wished to occupy the public mind with himself, summoned our bibliographer before the court for this error, which offended his vanity. This devout man consecrated a fraud, of which he had been guilty, and obtained against our poor bibliographer a decree and costs which amounted to 2000 francs! to be deducted from the subscription already reduced one-half by the debts of the journal _Le Quérard_.

Have we now sufficiently justified the title, as applied to the national bibliograph of France, of “A Martyr to Bibliography?”

(XXII.)—_M. le Baron Modeste de Korff, directeur en Chef de la Bibliothèque Impériale publique de Saint Petersbourg._ 1856; 8ᵛᵒ; 8.

He sometimes spells Korff—Korf.

(XXIII.)—_La Famille Guizot. Monographie bibliographique. Paris. L’auteur, rue Mazarine 27._ 1857; 8ᵛᵒ; 32.

Notices extracted from _Le Quérard_, and signed by Quérard.

(XXIV.)—_Un Martyr de la Bibliographie. Notice sur la vie et les travaux de J.-M. Quérard, auteur de la F. L., Supercheries L. D. etc., etc., suivie de la liste générale des personnes qui, en Europe et en Amérique, ont pris part à la souscription Quérard en 1855. (Extrait du tome XI. de la France Littéraire) Paris, l’éditeur, rue Mazarine, 27._ 1857; 8ᵛᵒ; 15 + 8.

The “notice” begins on page 5, and ends at 15, and is subscribed:—_Un compatriote et ami du Bibliographe Mar Jozon d’Erquar_ [anagram of Quérard]; then follows:—_Pièces dans la souscription-Quérard lettre des Promoteurs_.

It is signed _Ambroise-Firmin Didot, J.-B. Baillière, Hector Bossange et fils. Dated, Paris, 15 Nov., 1855._ From the _Feuilleton de la Bibliographie, de la France, 23 Nov., 1855_. Then follows:—_Pourquoi une souscription Quérard?_ signed by the latter and extracted from _Le Quérard_ of Dec. 1855. We then have:—_Liste générale de M. M. les libraires, bibliophiles littérateurs et bibliothécaires de l’Europe et de l’Amérique qui ont pris part à la souscription proposée par M. M. F. Didot, J.-B. Baillière, et H. Bossange et fils, en faveur du Bibliographe Français J.-M. Q. pp. 8_.

It is headed by the Emperor of the French 500 francs. The last name is “Watts (Thomas).” It amounts to nearly 4,500 francs.

(XXV.)—_Une question d’histoire littéraire résolue. Réfutation du paradoxe bibliographique de M. R. Chantelauze: le comte Joseph de Maistre auteur de “L’antidote au congrès de Rastadt.” Par l’auteur des S. L. D. Paris, l’auteur, rue Mazarine, 27. Lyon: Marius Conchon, libraire, rue Impériale, 15. 16 Juillet._ 1859; 42. Not in double columns.

Notice on _La vie et ouvrages du P. N. Grose. Par le P. A. A. Cadrès._ _Paris_, 1862, in the _Bulletin du Bouquiniste_ of Aubry. Paris, 8ᵛᵒ. p. 202.

He continued the _Feuillets de l’Encyclopédie (inédite) du Bibliothécaire_ (_E. H. A. Gaullieur_) in the _Bulletin du Bouquiniste_ of Aubrey. Paris, 1863, p. 371, et seq.

(XXVI.)—_Retouches au nouveau Dictionnaire des Ouvrages Anonymes et Pseudonymes de M. E. De Manne par l’auteur Des Supercheries Littéraires dévoilées. Paris, chez l’auteur, Quai Saint-Michel, 21. Juillet, 1862_; 8ᵛᵒ; VIII. 46 double columns, 4 francs. De Manne’s came out in May.

We advise any one who wishes to get an idea of these corrections to go through the six pages of errata at the end. Well may Quérard call De Manne an amateur bibliograph, when he allows such errors and defects to appear.

Dr. Petzholdt praises these “Retouches” very highly.[46]

“As for the Dictionary of M. de Manne, the “Retouches” comprises a table of authors, and a considerable errata of great ability, which will be precious for those who possess the work. This shows that M. Quérard does not consider the work of De Manne beneath his notice, as he takes the trouble to make it complete.”[47]

(XXVII.)—_Monographie Bibliographique._ (Half-title). _Les Robespierre. Monographie Bibliographique. Par J.-M. Q. Paris: L’Éditeur, Quai Saint-Michel, No. 21. Mars, 1863. 8ᵛᵒ; 44; 4 francs._ Double columns. It has no index.

Extracted from Vol. XII. of _La France Littéraire_. 100 copies printed. Comprises 320 articles.

“A little masterpiece, the perusal of which will greatly interest amateurs of historical researches. M. Quérard does not limit himself to the titles of books, he considers it necessary to know the contents. Thus arise certain prejudices against him. If he had written in more measured terms of authors his superior merit as a bibliographer would, we doubt not, be generally appreciated; for to him we owe several works which are among the best published in France.”[48]

(XXVIII.)—_De la Bibliographie Générale au dix-neuvième siècle et plus particulièrement du Manuel du Libraire et de l’amateur de livres. Lettre à M. Jacques-Charles Brunet, Chevalier de la Légion d’honneur, par J-M. Quérard, auteur de la France Littéraire, des Supercheries Dévoilées, du Quérard, etc., correspondant de la Société littéraire de Lyon. Paris: L’Éditeur, Quai Saint-Michel, 21. Avril, 1863; r. 8ᵛᵒ; 24._

Every one must regret the cause, and the unfortunate feelings, which prompted this bitterly written pamphlet, but which we, as biographers, must relate. At the same time no one can regret that the information contained in it was published. In 1844, Quérard inserted in his paper (see VIII.) a most severe, though just, criticism, by Joseph-Marie Guichard, on the 3rd edition of Brunet’s Manuel.[49]

According to Quérard, the whole of Brunet’s ill-feeling arose from this article; and, indeed, no one can be surprised, for the criticism is most damaging, and all the more effective for being written by a bibliographer thoroughly cognizant of his subject. Quérard begins with a few observations, in which he tells Brunet that he was at a loss to account for his animosity until the fourth volume of his _Manuel_ appeared. He then (2) gives a short life of Brunet, and a masterly summary of the different important bibliographical works published during the nineteenth century. (3) He reprints the learned criticism of Guichard, entitled _Du Manuel du Libraire et de l’Amateur de Livres, par M. J.-C. Brunet, IVᵉ édition. Tomes I.-III., et de La Littérature Française Contemporaine par M. J.-M. Q. Tomes I. et II. Extrait du Moniteur de la Librairie numéros des 10 et 20 février, 1844._ We then have (4) _Notices des Travaux Bibliographiques de J.-M. Q. Par M. J.-C. Brunet Remaniée au point de vue de la vérité altérée_, and Quérard’s observations upon Brunet’s notices in his _Manuel_. We are bound to say that Brunet scarcely gives even the titles of Quérard’s works correctly, whether on purpose or by accident we know not. Then (5) _Calomnies de M. Brunet_.

In his _Manuel_, Brunet remarks the disparity between the letters A to K, in his _Écrivains Pseudonymes_ (see p. 13), which are unproportionately short. Quérard explains that this volume (XI.) was, originally, only the commencement of the index for the _Supercheries_. But the editing of the _Littérature Contemporaine_ was so loose, so full of errors and omissions, that he felt sorry his name should be attached to it. He, however, enlarged his plan, so that he included in his book most of the omissions in the other. But as the work proceeded, he found that a great part of his matter was adopted by the editors of the last-mentioned work, and he then stopped his publication till the other was finished. He always intended to publish a second edition of this volume which would have then formed two or three, making it uniform with Vol XII., by which he wished his merits as a bio-bibliographer to be judged.[50]

(XXX.)—_Quelques mots sur M. Bossange père, doyen des imprimeurs et des libraires de Paris. Paris, 1864._ 4ᵗᵒ; 7.

Quérard’s quarrel with M. S. P. is one of the things most to be regretted in his career, but he does not seem to have had that valuable quality of making friends, and such was the obstinacy of his character, that he would have sacrificed his dearest friendship to an idea. In fact it is only from materials such as this that we ever obtain works of the nature of Quérard’s.

He has been called “the chief of French bibliographers,”[51] “the Patriarch and Apostle of men devoted to bibliographical studies,”[52] and many other equally flattering, though not unmerited, epithets. He was the first, and probably the last, person in France who attempted—with what success our readers have seen—to make a profession, and an honourable means of support out of the science of books. He must long have known the madness of the endeavour, yet such was his devotion to his darling art, he was totally unable to deviate from the path which inevitably led to failure, for one which might have brought success. Bibliography is an occupation that no one would follow with a fore-knowledge of the incessant sacrifices, the continuous labour, this introduction to all science claims at the hands of its votaries. But each one who comes fresh to the study, brings with him hopes and aspirations which are sufficient to buoy him up for many years in the struggle for knowledge; though ultimately to be, like all predecessors, disappointed by neglect, ignorance, and want of appreciation,[53]

Quérard was pre-eminently endowed with all the qualities which form a bibliographer, the principal being indefatigable perseverance and the strictest accuracy.[54] Of his character little is said; he was of a retiring disposition, modest and unpretending, with a just idea of the magnitude and importance of his labours, and a full knowledge of the most unmerited neglect and of the cause of that neglect. He was indefatigable in his application and worked unremittingly, a necessity, in fact, for any one who wishes to execute any bibliographical undertaking. For himself, though not for the literature of his country, it is to be deplored that this love of research was not exercised in some other calling in which such constant labour would have ensured an ordinary competency, if not the highest position. The bibliography of his works is, in fact, almost his biography. A most interesting feature of the latter, however, as he himself remarks, would be his relations with authors and publishers, and others with whom his publications brought him in contact; whether he has left such, time will probably show.

FOOTNOTES:

[1] It is curious that this work, like that of Quérard, should have been composed away from the repositories one would have expected the authors to consult. Many parallel circumstances may be traced both in the lives and works of these men, who so much benefited the literature of their country: without any benefit to themselves. Quérard was robbed of his work, as we shall presently see, and so was Watt. The former never recovered his. The Watts had a year’s labour before they recompiled the stolen sheets. CHAMBERS’ BIOG. DICT. OF EM: SCOTCH: IV. 439, 1856.

[2] We doubt whether so far as the public are concerned they are not gainers by his not being pensioned off with some such post. If he attended to his duties, would he have been able to go on with his work? In 1856, he himself complained that the Officers in the Imperial Library attended more to their own pursuits than to the Library or the public; although it is only open from 10 till 3, and no books to be asked for after ½ past 2. LE QUÉRARD, II., 564.

We have often thought what an amount of erudition a certain gentleman at the British Museum must possess: it always reminds us of the sphinx, it never speaks, nor does it impart its knowledge concealed behind that expansive forehead. Even if some of the knowledge were imparted, should we not then complain that our library was ill-attended to?

Upon this point we would refer the reader to Mr. Panizzi’s characteristic evidence taken before the “Select Committee on the British Museum 1836,” commencing at 4919.

[3] We cannot resist the temptation of giving this letter entire:—

“Mon cher ami, je suis toujours votre abonné naturel, ordinaire, et extraordinaire pour toutes vos publications. Je lis votre journal avec un vif intérêt, et je vois que vous gagnez du terrain dans ce grand désert de la bibliographie, où le sol aride produit à peine des pommes de terre. La note que vous avez mise à l’occasion de la mort du ministre m’a serré le cœur en me rappelant une des plus grosses injustices de ce temps-ci; mais que voulez-vous? il est arrêté en principe ministériel que les bibliothécaires ne sont pas des bibliographes; les choses allaient de même sans doute avant la Révolution puisque comme le dit Beaumarchais, il fallait un calculateur et ce fut un danseur qu’on choisit. Vous protestez contre cette énormité en publiant de bons travaux: le meilleur serait encore une seconde édition revue, et augmentée de votre ‘France Littéraire.’ Quant à ‘l’Encyclopédie du bibliothécaire,’ c’est tout du monde et le jour des créations n’appartient qu’au bon Dieu.

Croyez à mes sentiments bien dévouée,

“PAUL LACROIX, bibliophile JACOB.”

(LE QUÉRARD, II., 462, 1856.)

[4] INDÉPENDANCE BELGE, 3 August, 1856.

[5] The Bibliothèque Impériale at present possesses a keeper of the same calibre. Being asked one day by Quérard if he had works on “La Gaellique” and “Le Demotique.” What are those two things?—They are two languages.—Oh, then we have nothing. Note by Q. in 1854. He does not give the date of the above book?

[6] To show how hollow was the pretext for this legal robbery, the book though edited by four persons was not completed till 1857, and then in VII. vols. the last two subjects promised on the title-page have never been carried out.

[7] It is amusing for instance to find a translation of GULLIVER’S TRAVELS catalogued under the Christian name, as if “Lemuel (Gulliver)” were the author. See LA LITTÉRATURE CONTEMP. V. 80.

[8] For the criticisms on the part by Quérard, see REVUE DE BIB. ANA. 1840, p. 1094; and 1842, p. 994; and Nos. XVII. and XXIV.

[9] L’organe des chartistes, l’Athenæum français a cessé de paraître. Plan et titre étaient empruntés a un journal littéraire anglais qui compte un grand nombre d’années d’existence. LE QUÉRARD, II. 530. That is the Athenæum, and which contains a mass of authentic and useful matter next to perfectly useless for want of a GENERAL INDEX.

[10] One critic, who rejoiced in the name of Hippolyte Babou, fortunately gives us some guide to the value of his criticisms. The following is the order in which M. Hippolyte Babou would give biographical particulars:—1st, The names, Christian names or pseudonyms of the author. 2nd, A succinct biography, if any: the dates of his death, and birth; the principal events of his life. L’ATHENÆUM FRANÇAIS, 1854; 666.

[11] The insane prejudice against Mr. Panizzi, because he was of Italian birth, which was exhibited some years ago by a number of grossly ignorant detractors, will no doubt be recollected. For ourselves, though we have not the honor of knowing him, we consider Mr. Panizzi a patriotic Englishman, and whether he is or not proud of England, England ought to be proud of him.

[12] BULLETIN DU BIBLIOPHILE BELGE, I. 142-431. 1845. This article of M. Guichard is reprinted in No. XXIV.

[13] BULLETIN DU BIBLIOPHILE BELGE, I. 357. 1845.

[14] In the preface the following observations occur:—The English who have so many special bibliographers, have not one who has occupied himself with anonyms and pseudonyms; we will not say universal, but not even of their own nation. Watt does not cite any in his BIBLIOTHECA BRITANNICA. M. Philarète Chasles, one of those French writers who has been greatly instrumental in introducing foreign literature to us, has recently traced out a most exhaustive plan for English literature, similar to that which other civilized nations already possess. The REVUE DES DEUX MONDES, (Series 5, VI. 757, 1844) contains an excellent article from his pen, which begins thus:—“In the whole history of literature, there is not a more fantastical group of whimsicalities than that of the English pseudonyms which abound between 1688 and 1800; nor is there any subject so new and unexplored, and yet so little explained. It was at that time some hundreds of writers, amongst whom I shall only take certain notabilities, deliberately renounced the lustre of their own names, and sacrificed their vanity to their interest or passion. If they concealed their names and disguised their hand it was to carry out their work better: one wishes to destroy an ancient reputation which is in his way; another wants to popularise sentiments which he considers useful; others to glorify the national vanity; the greater part to make their fortunes. There are the innocent and honest, as De Foe; the violent and imprudent, like Chatterton; the foolish, like Ireland; the unskilful and the calumniators, like Landor; and lastly, the expert, the Scotchman Macpherson, who deceived an entire generation of Europe and America.” Burke’s “imitation” of Bolingbroke may amongst numerous others be mentioned. It would perhaps be difficult to find a better example of the necessity there is for a good English bibliographical work, like LA FRANCE LITTÉRAIRE, than the information Bohn’s LOWNDES gives about Burke’s writings. The “imitation” is not even mentioned, and in the life, by Prior, there is scarcely a scrap of bibliographical information. Generally, we concur in Mr. Hazlett’s very severe condemnation of Lowndes, though it must not be forgotten it is the only one we have. Mr. H. while professing not to be critical, in reality “damns the book.” “It may have been a well-meant scheme.” HAND-BOOK TO EARLY ENGLISH LITERATURE, 1867, p. VI.

A masterly article upon Burke will be found in ALLIBONE’S CRITICAL DICT. OF ENG. LIT. 1859. This is without doubt one of the most extensive and boldest literary enterprises of the day, entirely executed by one man. It does not contain much bibliographical matter, as the plan precluded it.

As Dr. Petzholdt remarks:—“Enthält zwar eine grosse Masse litterarischer Materialien, die aber mit allzu grosser Oekonomie zusammengetragen sind, als dass sie für bibliographische Zwecke sonderlichen Nutzen haben.” BIBLIOTHECA BIBLIOGRAPHICA, p. 419.

“And the judgment of the learned upon English authors” is no longer a desideratum. Bolton Corney, CURIOSITIES OF LIT. ILLUSTRATED.

[15] We can assure our readers that this Old Nick is no relation of the Gentleman so often mentioned in England.

[16] BULLETIN DU BIBLIOPHILE BELGE, II. 78, 1845.

[17] See La L. F. C. of Bourquelot, IV., 104.

[18] BULLETIN DU BIBLIOPHILE BELGE, III. 400, 1846.

[19] B. du B. B. III. 400. 1846.

[20] Years ago we were informed that Mr. Glover, Her Majesty’s Librarian, had a large collection for a work on anonymous and pseudonymous writers of England QUAR. REV. LXXII., 8.

[21] What would the writer in the Athenæum (1849) have said if he had been told at the time, when he was ridiculing the “500” volumes the catalogue was to be in, that it would ultimately be three times that number!

[22] BULLETIN DU BIBLIOPHILE BELGE IV; 222; 1846.

[23] B. DU B. B. IV. 444. 1847.

[24] B. DU B. B. VI. 149-419. 1849.

[25] L’INDÉPENDANCE BELGE. 3 August 1856.

[26] BULLETIN DU BIBLIOPHILE BELGE, III.; 401.

[27] The following is the title of the first part:—

Les Auteurs Apocryphes supposés déguisés plagiaires et les éditeurs infidèles de la littérature française pendant les quatre derniers siècles ensemble les industriels littéraires et les lettrés qui se sont enoblés à notre époque. Par J.-M. Q. auteur de L. F. L., 1ʳᵉ livre Paris l’Éditeur 1846; pp. 80.

[28] BULLETIN DU BIBLIOPHILE BELGE, IV., 66. 1847.

[29] This is erroneous, Quérard declares that he alone was the author, and the chief assistance he had was from the catalogues of the dramatic agents.

[30] BULLETIN DU BIBLIOPHILE BELGE, IV.; 206.

[31] IBID, IV.; 352.

[32] IBID, IV.; 434.

[33] IBID, VII.; 398. 1850.

[34] IBID, VII.; 160. 1851.

[35] SUPERCHERIES, I. 484, 511.

[36] BULLETIN DU BIBLIOPHILE BELGE, XX, 141. 1864.

[37] In NOTES AND QUERIES, may it live long and prosperous, some very ridiculous signatures have been from time to time adopted. One gentleman indulges in the following:—“Thinks I to myself,” to the great discomfort of all autonyms. A table of pseudonyms, and the real names of the writers in this useful little journal, would be more than curious and interesting; it would make many notes authoritative. We wish the editor could be encouraged to reveal the pseudonyms, if only of the first and second series.

[38] Preface, LES ÉCRIVAINS PSEUD.

[39] BULLETIN DU BIBLIOPHILE BELGE VI.; 354.

[40] IBID, V.; 132.

[41] B. DU B. B. XX.; 198.

[42] Le Quérard in announcing the MEMOIRS OF LIBRAIRES, by Edward Edwards, of the BRITISH MUSEUM, DECLARES THAT THE AUTHOR WROTE DIE MASKIRTE LITERATUR DER ALTEREN UND NEUREN. LEIPZIG; 1856; imp. 8ᵛᵒ; von EMIL WELLER, and that Emil Weller is Mr. Edward Edwards’ pseudonym. We can scarcely credit this, seeing the number of works Dr. Petzholdt[A] ascribes to the former, and the latter’s constant literary occupations at home. If the above is right, we may compliment Mr. Edwards upon his German, and Herr Weller upon his correct English titles and familiarity with our Institutions. We beg respectfully to suggest to Mr. Edwards, NOTES AND QUERIES, as a medium for contradicting this, if it is not a fact. We are glad of an opportunity of thanking him for the information we have derived from many of his works, and particularly his MEMOIRS OF LIBRARIES.

[A] Bibliotheca Bibliographica, Kritisches Verzeichniss der das Gesammtgebiet der Bibliographie Betreffenden Litteratur des in- und auslandes in systematischer ordnung bearbeitet von Dr. Julius Petzholdt. Mit alphabetischem namen- und Sachregister. Leipzig. Verlag von Wilhelm Engelmann. 1866; 8ᵛᵒ; xii. 939.

[43] In announcing the death of this gentleman, Quérard writes:—

“M. Fortoul était très affable et rempli de bienveillance. Nous en citons une preuve entre mille.

Un soir des premiers jours d’Octobre de l’année dernière (1855), un pauvre solliciteur revenait de l’hôtel du ministre de l’instruction publique; il était très satisfait!!! Il sortait d’une audience qui lui avait été accordée, et dans laquelle le ministère avait été pour lui d’une extrême bonté, quoique le personnage très intimidé de se trouver dans un cabinet ministériel fût bien décontenancé, et ait dû paraître passablement gauche au ministre. Mais M. Fortoul connaissait les ouvrages du rude travailleur qui se trouvait en sa présence, et sa franchise lui plut; aussi l’accueillit-il mieux qu’un homme à jactance et à prestance assurées.

Ce solliciteur était l’auteur de LA FRANCE LITTÉRAIRE. M. Fortoul lui promit de le dédommager de l’indifférence de ses prédécesseurs, sauf de M. Guizot, en 1830. L’occasion ne s’est pas présentée de tenir la promesse qu’il avait faite au bibliographe; mais il s’en rappellera dans le monde meilleur pour lequel il est parti, et la bibliographie sera relevée un jour en notre personne par une place de bibliothécaire—chez le Père éternel.” LE QUÉRARD, II., 446.

[44] Nothing could be more apposite to his position than Mathias’ remarks:—“The want of discretion and prudence has ruined more men of learning and of genius than the time would allow me to mention. Without this sobriety of intellect, nothing is strong, nothing is great.... The world will but smile at such scholars; and ministers when called upon to promote them, will tell you, not without reason, that “THEY ARE NOT PRODUCIBLE.” Those who in confidence of superior capacities or attainments, DISREGARD THE COMMON MAXIMS OF LIFE, shall be reminded that nothing will supply the want of prudence.” PURSUITS OF LITERATURE, 1812; 4ᵗᵒ; 366.

The numerous and copious notes in this work remind us that we should apologise for our own. But it seems some cannot write without them, and others, a very small minority indeed, with them. It has been said that notes to a book show want of thought, but surely this could not be a reproach to the one we have just quoted. The young German students we are told rush into print and oceans of notes directly their college life is over. (ROGERS. VANITY AND GLORY OF LIT.) Struvinus says that lawyers are especially apt to give too many notes. We do not think this aptitude confined to them. Mr. Bolton Corney, in 30 pages, has 110 notes. (See his excellent critique on THE NEW GENERAL BIOGRAPHICAL DICT. 1839. 8ᵛᵒ; 35.) Basil Montagu’s notes sometimes rival the size of his work. George Ensor, in the INDEPENDENT MAN, has 1000; and Buckle, in his INTRODUCTION, has 10,000. What would become of Dibdin deprived of his notes!

[45] To the honor of America several names of Philadelphians appear. And to America the mother country was content to leave that honor, for not a single English name of note appears but those of Antonio Panizzi, J. Winter Jones and Thomas Watts.

[46] PETZHOLDT. BIBLIOTHECA BIBLIOGRAPHICA, p. 106.

[47] CHERBULIEZ in the REVUE CRITIQUE, 1863.

[48] Joel Cherbuliez “Revue Critique,” 1863. B. DU B. B., XIX., 213, 417. See also M. de Stacy, “Journal des Débats,” July 12, 1855, p. 3.

[49] The consequence of this criticism was to obtain for Guichard, though a celebrated and talented author, only a single line in the foot notes of the 5th edition of Brunet’s Manuel. For critique see B. DU B. B., XIX., 214, 1863.

[50] See also B. DU B. B., XX., 141, 1864.

[51] M. Aug. Scheler, bibliothécaire de S. M. le roi des Belges in the BULLETIN DU BIBLIOPHILE BELGE, 1856, p. 302.

[52] His Ex. M. Modeste de Korf, letter to Quérard, 1856.

[53] That this should be so is a reproach to the education of Englishmen; and yet so it is, and always has been. Important as is the science of books, there is not a man that can be pointed out who, after having devoted a life-time to its study, has been adequately rewarded. Let us simply take as an instance the last man who has been disappointed, who intended, no doubt, to contribute to English bibliography what should prove a useful literary addition, instead of which it is a useful commercial manual. He complains as each part of his work appears:—

“The labour required to make anything like a perfect Manual of Bibliography, is, both physically and mentally, far beyond what would be conceived by those who have not engaged in such duties, while the requital of even a successful achievement would be below what might be derived from the most ordinary pursuit.”

He then cites Dr. Watt, and “Lowndes, after years of unwearied exertion, died in distress.” ( Part II .)

“The book does not pay at its present price.” (