This had never before been published in French, although a translation of it had been issued by the Hakluyt Society in 1859. The _MS_. is the only one of Champlain's known to exist, excepting a letter to Richelieu, published by Laverdière among the "Pièces Justificatives." When used by Laverdière it was in the possession of M. Féret, of Dieppe, but has since been advertised for sale by the Paris booksellers, Maisonneuve & Co., at the price of 15,000 francs, and is now in the possession of M. Pinart. The volume printed in 1632 has been frequently compared with that of 1613, as if the former were merely a second edition of the latter. But this conveys an erroneous idea of the relation between the two. In the first place, the volume of 1632 contains what is not given in any of the previous publications of Champlain. That is, it extends his narrative over the period from 1620 to 1632. It likewise goes over the same ground that is covered not only by the volume of 1613, but also by the other still later publications of Champlain, up to 1620. It includes, moreover, a treatise on navigation. In the second place, it is an abridgment, and not a second edition in any proper sense. It omits for the most part personal details and descriptions of the manners and customs of the Indians, so that very much that is essential to the full comprehension of Champlain's work as an observer and explorer is gone. Moreover, there seems a to be some internal evidence indicating that this abridgment was not made by Champlain himself, and Laverdière suggests that the work has been tampered with by another hand. Thus, all favorable allusions to the Récollets, to whom Champlain was friendly, are modified or expunged, while the Jesuits are made to appear in a prominent and favorable light. This question has been specially considered by Laverdière in his introduction to the issue of 1632, to which the reader is referred. The language used by Champlain is essentially the classic French of the time of Henry IV. The dialect or patois of Saintonge, his native province, was probably understood and spoken by him; but we have not discovered any influence of it in his writings, either in respect to idiom or vocabulary. An occasional appearance at court, and his constant official intercourse with public men of prominence at Paris and elsewhere, rendered necessary strict attention to the language he used.