whilst the time of six persons was more or less wasted on Sir N. Harris Nicolas, who complains of the attendant, after not only a good explanation but a respectful apology, and who, moreover, ventures to assert in his Correspondence (See Letter No. X) that I justify the attendant "in refusing the book," whereas nothing can be clearer than that the attendants, one and all, far from refusing any book, did all they could, and more than they were bound, to find it, and that Sir Nicholas was fully aware of this, when he wrote that letter.

If any one among those who act under my direction, fails in his duty, I never shall hesitate in taking proper notice of it; but I will never allow any of them, whatever be his station, to be unjustly accused without defending him. When I answered Sir N. Harris Nicolas's first letter, I very briefly stated only such facts as proved the injustice of his accusation, without giving any opinion whatever: the reasons for my moderation have been given. This moderation did not avail me much. Sir N. H. Nicolas was not only dissatisfied with my letter, but, in his reply, (No. III.) he shifted his ground, and complained of "the difficulties and delay arising from the present regulations, and the state of the Catalogues." If the difficulties and delay arise from the regulations, then his complaint of neglect against the attendant was a most ungenerous proceeding; and if he thought this complaint well grounded, he would not complain of the system. As he talked of the attention of the Trustees being called to this subject, I begged of him (No. IV. and V.) to prove what he had asserted—the truth of the habitual delay, and its cause. He declined the offer (which a man, convinced of the veracity of his statements, would have willingly accepted) and wrote in a much lower tone. (No. VI.) I again called on him to specify his charges, (No. VII.) and told him that his unfavourable opinions must be "of a recent date." He denied this, carefully avoiding entering into any particulars, but went on with generalities, (No. VIII.) except as to "Press-marks, &c." which he declared to be the source of delay. In answer to this recent accusation, I employed the very arguments and words which he himself had long before used in praise of this very system and arrangement. (No. IX.) His own words and arguments made him still more dissatisfied, and he vehemently condemned them. (No. X.) Upon which I sent him, enclosed in No. XI. a copy of his own letter of the 20th of October, 1837; and, as he had been taunting me with what he had printed and meant to print against me, I called on him to print along with it this letter. This he declined to do, (No. XII.) though, in the Spectator of the 30th of May, he continued his attacks—not without some awkwardness, however, now that he knew the proof I had of what he had so indignantly denied, the recent date of his unfavourable opinions.

In the course of the Correspondence, Sir N. H. Nicolas endeavoured to drag me into a controversy about Catalogues, and a variety of other points connected with the Library. I did not feel disposed to enter into a profitless discussion with such an adversary. In the Spectator, too, he has indulged in making assertions, and passing sentence on every thing which he assumes that I have ever done, or now do. I shall not defend myself, except before a competent judge. Whenever an inquiry, which I have courted, (Letters No. IV. and V.) and still court, and from which Sir Nicholas Harris Nicolas has shrunk, and will shrink, shall take place, either before the Trustees, or before any "higher authority" whatever, I will prove, what I stated in my Letter No. XI., that no reliance can be placed on his opinions and assertions. I shall take no further notice, either of anything that Sir N. Harris Nicolas may say, or of any anonymous attack whatsoever.

A. PANIZZI.

British Museum,
June 5th, 1846.

CORRESPONDENCE
BETWEEN SIR NICHOLAS H. NICOLAS
AND MR. PANIZZI.

No. I. Sir N. H. Nicolas to Mr. Panizzi.

Torrington Square, 18th May, 1846.

My dear Sir,

I BEG leave to acquaint you with what occurred to me to-day in the Reading Room of the British Museum, thinking it a proper subject of complaint.

At a few minutes after three o'clock, I wrote, according to the present forms, for five books. After half an hour four of them were brought me. The fifth, viz. "Burchett's complete History of Transactions at Sea," not having appeared, I spoke twice to Mr. Scott, who assured me that he had often applied for it, and that on his last application he was told that I had given a wrong Press-mark, which he had corrected. I denied that I had given a wrong Press-mark. At half-past four I again asked for the book; and a strong observation having caused the gentleman who succeeded Mr. Cates to attend to the matter, he ascertained that I had given both the Title and the Press-mark correctly. A person then came to me from the Library. His first excuse was, that though the Press-mark and the Title were correctly given, I had erroneously quoted the date! This was true; but I submit that when a Press-mark, and a Title are correctly stated, the book ought to be forthcoming; or, at all events, that some explanation should be afforded before an hour and a half. I told him so; and his excuse then was, that he had only had my ticket half an hour, and that he had sent me FOUR books! How far this may be a justification it is for you to judge; and I leave the facts without comment for your consideration,

I remain, &c.

I ought to add, that the person's manner was not disrespectful.

No. II. Mr. Panizzi to Sir N. H. Nicolas.

British Museum, May 19th, 1846.

My dear Sir,

I HASTEN to answer your letter of yesterday's date, which I have this moment received.

With reference to the delay of which you complain in the delivery of four out of five of the works you asked, it is now impossible for me to find on whom the fault rests. Had you informed me of the delay at the moment, I might have been more successful. The attendant who sent those four works to the Reading Room has not been here long; and may, therefore, have been less prompt in finding them than a more experienced hand might have been, and I regret it.

As to the fifth book, it appears from your letter that you required a folio printed at London in 1720. You have, however, given on the ticket the size as 8vo. the place as "fvr," which, may be, is meant for London, and the date 1704. There is in the catalogue a work of Burchett different from the one you wanted, and immediately preceding it, "8vo. Lond. 1704." You mistook this part of the entry of what you did not want, and applied it to what you did.

Should you not deem this answer satisfactory, I will thank you by your informing me of it, that I may lay your complaint before the Trustees.

Believe me, &c.

No. III. Sir N. H. Nicolas to Mr. Panizzi.

Torrington Square, 19th May, 1846.

My dear Sir,

In reply to your letter I beg leave to say, that your explanation is wholly