Racine, and Moliere.

I don't talk of the busts, the statues, and pictures which abound
at Versailles, and other places in and about Paris, particularly
the great collection of capital pieces in the Palais-royal,
belonging to the duke of Orleans. I have neither capacity, nor
inclination, to give a critique on these chef d'oeuvres, which
indeed would take up a whole volume. I have seen this great
magazine of painting three times, with astonishment; but I should
have been better pleased, if there had not been half the number:
one is bewildered in such a profusion, as not to know where to
begin, and hurried away before there is time to consider one
piece with any sort of deliberation. Besides, the rooms are all
dark, and a great many of the pictures hang in a bad light. As
for Trianon, Marli, and Choissi, they are no more than pigeon-houses,
in respect to palaces; and, notwithstanding the
extravagant eulogiums which you have heard of the French king's
houses, I will venture to affirm that the king of England is
better, I mean more comfortably, lodged. I ought, however, to
except Fontainebleau, which I have not seen.

The city of Paris is said to be five leagues, or fifteen miles,
in circumference; and if it is really so, it must be much more
populous than London; for the streets are very narrow, and the
houses very high, with a different family on every floor. But I
have measured the best plans of these two royal cities, and am
certain that Paris does not take up near so much ground as
London and Westminster occupy; and I suspect the number of its
inhabitants is also exaggerated by those who say it amounts to
eight hundred thousand, that is two hundred thousand more than