the limits of purely contrapuntal orthodoxy. Any other treatment is styled "illegitimate." I had hoped to avoid this terrible word,—the great bugbear among conscientious students of the organ,—nor do I propose to enter into any analysis of what the "legitimate" may or may not consist in. The fact is, we should all retain our original opinions very much according to our early education, natural tastes, and impressions. There has been much controversy on this point, and I do not think it necessary to contribute to that. In any case, where the subject under discussion cannot be considered as a positive right or wrong, but largely as a matter of taste or preference, there will always be a difference of opinion.

Froude, the historian, says in one of his published lectures: "Controversy has kept alive a certain quantity of bitterness; and that, I suspect, is all that it would accomplish if continued till the day of judgment.... Each polemic writes for his own partisans, and makes no impression on his adversary." So it would be in this case.

The inference which I draw from this superficial glance at the main characteristics of these three schools, is this:—

The American student who would excel as an organist, must first be thoroughly educated in the German school of playing. Here alone can he gain the solid technique which will fit him for the execution of any tasks he may propose to himself. Only from that mine of musical wealth, the German school, especially as represented by Bach, can the suitable foundation-stones for the desired structure be derived. But with this foundation broadly and deeply laid, as the building progresses upward, the best of architects may, without fear, add many things that simply please the eye, but bear no relation whatever to the strength or durability of the edifice. So with the education of the organ student; first the broad foundation, and then a judicious liberalism. His auditors will always remain the great public, and that public to the end of time will never be so versed in musical science that it can appreciate the stricter forms of organ music. But very many among the public can appreciate, or at least enjoy; and this number is increasing from year to year. I am by no means arguing that the organist should avoid these stricter forms on this account; quite the contrary; but simply that the judicious liberalism above referred to should provide as great a variety of musical food as will suit and satisfy the musical appetite within the means of the instrument as it now exists. Nor should the "milk for babes" be despised. The workings of this principle will surely attract rather than repel, and maturer musical strength will instinctively call for heartier food. We have to deal with men as we find them, and tastes vary. A programme intended for a miscellaneous audience is, after all, only a musical bill of fare. Real musical hunger can only be satisfied with solids; but if we first quiet the deeper cravings with roast beef, I know of no moral obligation why we should not finish with ice-cream, if inclination should point that way. To invert the order would be manifestly unsound.

To my mind, then, the duty of the American organist of to-day is to be eclectic. He has no "call" to tie himself up exclusively and strictly to any one particular school; nor, if he pursues the right course, need his education, technical or æsthetic, suffer on this account. But he must justify this argument by being thorough in what he undertakes. The skill with which a thing is done goes far to justify it, if there is any question at all about the matter. Not that I suppose that many can be found, who, with all talent and due diligence, can equally excel in all styles; still the effect of liberalism in this respect cannot but have a good effect upon the general culture, and aid not a little towards the accomplishment of that great problem, professional success.

I cannot close without a congratulatory word respecting the standing, present and prospective, of the profession in America to-day. I am proud that we begin to be able to point to so many musicians (even if the number is still relatively few) who, both from their own scientific standpoint, and from that of general culture, are deemed worthy of being placed side by side with the other learned professions. Is not the creation of this college as a branch of a university course, proof of this comparatively new but happily increasing appreciation? Of what importance, then, to keep this present status intact, to secure it, to increase it, by upholding the dignity of our profession! Let such as propose to devote their lives to it, both feel and practise the idea so beautifully expressed by Schiller in his "Ode to the Artists"—