seems to think that he has waded through a great deal of dirt of some kind or other, which might have been better avoided; and that, in consequence, some general declaration, by way of wiping, off a portion of the adhering mud, is due to the original Author.  Accordingly, at the end of his analysis of M. Licquet’s version, (which forms the second Letter in the brochure) he does me the honour to devote seven pages to the notice of my humble lucubrations:—­and he prefaces this “Notice des Ouvrages de M. Dibdin", by the following very handsome tribute to their worth: 

Si, dans les deux Lettres ou nous avons rendu compte des traductions partielles du voyage de M.D., nous avons partage l’opinion des deux estimable traducteurs, sur quelques erreurs et quelques inconvenances echappees a l’auteur anglais, nous sommes bien eloigne d’envelopper dans le meme blame, tout ce qui est sorte de sa plume; car il y auroit injustice a lui refuser des connaissances tres etendues en histoire litteraire, et en bibliographie:  nous le disons franchement, il faudroit fermer les yeux a la lumiere, ou etre d’une partialite revoltante, pour ne pas convenir que, juste appreciateur de tous les tresors bibliographiques qu’il a le bonheur d’avoir sous la main, M. Dibdin en a fait connoitre en detail toute la richesse dans de nombreux d’ouvrages, ou tres souvent le luxe d’erudition se trouve en harmonie avec le luxe typographique qu’il y a etale.

At the risk of incurring the imputation of vanity, I annex the preceding extract; because I am persuaded that the candid Reader will appreciate it in its proper light.  I might, had I chosen to do so, have lengthened the extract by a yet more complimentary passage:  but enough of M. Peignot—­who, so far from suffering ill will or acerbity to predominate over a kind disposition, hath been pleased, since his publication, to write to me a very courteous Letter,[7] and to solicit a “continuance of my favours.”

Agreeably to the intimation expressed in a preceding page, I am now, in due order, to notice the labours of my translators M.M.  LICQUET and CRAPELET.  Their united version appeared in 1825, in four octavo volumes, of which the small paper was but indifferently well printed.[8] The preface to the first two volumes is by M. Licquet:  and it is not divested of point and merit.  It begins by attacking the Quarterly Review, (June 1821, p. 147.) for its severity of animadversion on the supposed listlessness and want of curiosity of the French in exploring the architectural antiquities of their country; and that, in consequence of such supineness, the English, considering them as their own property, have described them accordingly.  “The decision (says the French translator) is severe; happily it is without foundation.”  After having devoted several pages to observations by way of reply to that critical Journal, M. Licquet continues thus:—­unless I have unintentionally misrepresented him.