Part 2

(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]