interval, and who gave me the reception of which I have spoken. Unable
to suppose any other cause for it than some misunderstanding relative to
the supper, and perceiving he had no inclination to explain, I resolved
to visit him no longer, but I still continued to send him my works: he
frequently sent me his compliments, 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