improving London 1760, Notice from Commissioners for paving,--AND, LASTLY, PERIODICAL PUBLICATIONS. My words in the Introduction are: "It gives me pleasure to acknowledge I have been indebted to my worthy friend Mr. Nichols for the inspection of his matchless collection of periodical publications, _from which great part of my materials_ have been selected." Whether they were the sole sources of my Anecdotes let the above list of authorities testify, which the reader may verify by turning over the following pages. If the Reviewer _has read_ this work, I charge him on his conscience to say why he asserts my information depends wholly upon lying newspapers, &c. Where, _alas!_ has the "full spirit of moral honesty" evaporated which he so calmly professes? Two sentences more, and I have done with the Anti-Jacobin. I am treated with the utmost superciliousness for attempting to prove that many male and female figures are to be found in London equal to the celebrated statues of the Venus de Medicis and the Apollo Belvidere, which were alluded to by the words _Grecian Apollos_ and _Venuses_.--What, am I to be told that my powers of discrimination "are far _above par_," because I assert the British human form is equal to the conceptions of the antient Grecians? This "Grey-beard," as he calls himself, must have studied the Arts in a Mercantile way indeed, or he would have pronounced my powers were _below par_ in saying they were only _equal_, as, upon a moment's consideration, I am convinced there are hundreds of persons in London whose forms in general, and the swells of their muscles, as far surpass the statues in question, excellent as they may be, as the works of God ever did and ever must exceed those of man. Indeed, the best Artists invariably acknowledge with humility and regret how very inferior their works are to the common productions of Nature. Then how extremely ridiculous are these words of the Reviewer: "That the Metropolis can furnish many beautiful figures both male and female, from the _millions_ of its inhabitants, we readily allow; but that perfection of form and _character_ which _characterises_ an Apollo and a Venus, has _but few_, very _few resemblances_." I am almost tempted to say the latter part of this paragraph is impious: The most complicated, wonderful, and beautiful specimen of the powers of the _Creator_, exceeded by the works of the _created_; nay, so far exceeded as to leave but few even of resemblances!!! Has the Reviewer read that indefatigable and accurate author Keysler? Hear what he says of the Venus de Medicis, after paying it the just tribute due to superior excellence: "The head is by most Connoisseurs considered as too small in proportion to the rest of the body, particularly the hips; some censure the nose as too large; and possibly the furrow along the vertebræ of the back is something too deep, especially as the object represents a soft plump female; and both the bend of the arms and