nts, and one evening, meeting him in the
green-room of the French theatre, he obligingly reproached me with not
having called to see him, which, however, did not induce me to depart
from my resolution. Therefore this affair had rather the appearance of a
coolness than a rupture. However, not having heard of nor seen him since
that time, it would have been too late after an absence of several years,
to renew my acquaintance with him. It is for this reason M. de Joinville
is not named in my list, although I had for a considerable time
frequented his house.

I will not swell my catalogue with the names of many other persons with
whom I was or had become less intimate, although I sometimes saw them in
the country, either at my own house or that of some neighbor, such for
instance as the Abbes de Condillac and De Malby, M. de Mairan, De la
Lalive, De Boisgelou, Vatelet, Ancelet, and others. I will also pass
lightly over that of M. de Margency, gentleman in ordinary of the king,
an ancient member of the 'Coterie Holbachique', which he had quitted as
well as myself, and the old friend of Madam d'Epinay from whom he had
separated as I had done; I likewise consider that of M. Desmahis, his
friend, the celebrated but short-lived author of the comedy of the
Impertinent, of much the same importance. The first was my neighbor in
the country, his estate at Margency being near to Montmorency. We were
old acquaintances, but the neighborhood and a certain conformity of
experience connected us still more. The last died soon afterwards. He
had merit and even wit, but he was in some degree the original of his
comedy, and a little of a coxcomb with women, by whom he was not much
regretted.

I cannot, however, omit taking notice of a new correspondence I entered
into at this period, which has had too much influence over the rest of my
life not to make it necessary for me to mark its origin. The person in
question is De Lamoignon de Malesherbes of the 'Cour des aides', then
censor of books, which office he exercised with equal intelligence and
mildness, to the great satisfaction of men of letters. I had not once
been to see him at Paris; yet I had never received from him any other
than the most obliging condescensions relative to the censorship, and I
knew that he had more than once very severely reprimanded persons who had
written against me. I had new proofs of his goodness upon the subject of
the edition of Eloisa. The proofs