That Fauchard, in common with all men of rare merit, had to combat all his life against envy, we are able to perceive from what we read at the end of the second volume of his work. The author here says that “the rumor having been falsely set about that he has abandoned the profession; which rumor cannot have been invented otherwise than by those individuals who, sacrificing honor to interest, would attract to themselves the persons who honor the author with their confidence; he therefore finds it necessary to give warning that he still continues the practice of his art in Paris, in the _Rue de la Comédie Française_, together with his brother-in-law and sole student, M. Duchemin.” More than a century and a half has passed by since Fauchard was obliged to defend himself against lies invented and set about to his damage by envious colleagues, but even at the present day, when, given the high grade that civilization has reached, and professional competition ought not to make use of other weapons than intelligence, study, and application, some do not hesitate to have recourse to means equally disloyal, ignoble, and shameless as those practised by some contemptible dentists of the middle of the eighteenth century. [Illustration: A CHARLATAN ON HIS PUBLIC STAGE] The preface of Fauchard’s book is especially important for the notices therein contained regarding the author, as well as the conditions of dental art at that period. And first of all, we find in it the proof of what we have already said elsewhere, namely, that even before Fauchard, there were not only tooth-pullers but also dentists properly so called. Indeed, Fauchard makes mention also of the examination that aspirant dentists had to undergo as far back as the year 1700. It may interest our readers if we here give in detail some extracts in which the author speaks on these subjects: “Although surgery in general,” says Fauchard, “has been greatly perfected in these latter times; although important discoveries have been made in anatomy and in the modes of operating, and many learned and interesting observations have been published, nevertheless, dentists nowhere find in works on surgery sufficient aids to guide them in all their operations.” These last words should be sufficient alone to prove that the dentists spoken of by Fauchard were not mere tooth-pullers. “The authors who have written on anatomy, on surgical diseases and operations, have only treated very superficially the part relating to maladies of the mouth and teeth. If some writers have spoken in particular about the teeth and their diseases, as, for instance, Urbain Hemard and B. Martin, they have not done so in a sufficiently ample manner. “Besides, there does not exist any public or private course of surgery in which the theory of dental maladies is amply taught and in which one can receive fundamental instruction in this art, so necessary for the healing of these maladies and of those of the neighboring parts.