Library of The Harvard Musical Association

Bulletin No. 17 January, 1949

Library Committee CHARLES R. NUTTER GEORGE B. WESTON CYRUS W. DURGIN WERNER MUELLER WALDO S. KENDALL ALEXANDER W. WILLIAMS Director of the Library and Library and Custodian of the Marsh Room Marsh Room Marsh Room CHARLES R. NUTTER MURIEL FRENCH FLORENCE C. ALLEN

To the Members of the Association: Your attention is called to an article in this issue by Edward B. Hill. * * * * At the annual meeting on January 24 the following officers and directors were elected.

President—Richard Wait Vice‐President—John V. Spalding Treasurer—Waldo S. Kendall Secretary—Albert C. Titcomb Directors Robert H. Hopkins John Codman Malcolm H. Holmes * * * * The last bulletin discussed the first six concert seasons of the Harvard Orchestra, with reference to Mr. Dwight’s report on each and the financial reports of James Sturgis, Treasurer of the Concert Committee. This bulletin continues the story. The seventh season (1871‐72) was successful in all respects and brought all the rewards of successful management. Dwight’s report discussed several important matters and a portion of it is included here for the record.

Anticipating a season of unprecedented musical activity, with an unusual number of formidable competitors in the field of concert‐giving (enough to mention the Thomas orchestra, Nilsson, the Dolly troupe, the oratorios, Mr. Peck’s concerts, etc., etc.), your committee saw the necessity of taking very early measures to secure the usual guaranty subscription for season tickets among members. Early in June, therefore, the circular appeal was issued, and it met with such prompt and liberal response that, before the 10th of September, the success of the 7th season was morally certain. In view of the numerous drafts that would be made on people’s pockets by such multitudes of tempting entertainments, and of the desirableness of putting the best music within the reach of real music‐lovers who (too often) have not much to spend, it was thought best to reduce the price of season tickets from $10 to $8 and of the single ticket from $1.25 to $1.00. This, of course, without a very considerable increase of attendance, which it was hardly reasonable to expect, would have reduced the income twenty per cent; applied (say) to the preceding season, it would have just eaten up the entire net profit ($2,932) of that season. But on the other hand, there had been frequent complaint made on the part too of the best judges, that our orchestra of late years had been unnecessarily large—too large, considering the indifferent quality of some of the musicians, for the best rendering of the programmes; and, as the orchestra constitutes the largest item of expense, it was thought that a more select and smaller orchestra, with some smaller economies, would very nearly make up the difference. The orchestra, which had averaged 63 men, therefore, was reduced to an average of 55⅘. More than usual pains were taken in the making up of the programmes. It was thought important to offer as much of novelty as was consistent with the uniformly high standard of these concerts from the first, and with that never‐failing expectation of the dear familiar master works which we never can afford to disappoint. There did not seem to be much call this time, as there was the year before, on the part of some who seemed to be an incipient party of “the Future” among us, for a large introduction of Liszt and Wagner and other living orchestral composers into our programmes. Fortunately the Thomas concerts had settled all that difficulty for us, by trying the experiment and saving us the risk and trouble; our public heard and were not edified; few listeners enjoyed the new as they had enjoyed the old; so that by persevering patiently in the old faith for one year longer the problem ceased to be embarrassing. Yet for the sake of further proof and illustration a very few specimens of the new school were introduced, so safely guarded and contrasted with unquestioned models that they could do no harm; indeed the contrast proved instructive; the sterling beauty of the real masters was the more appreciated. But in new works (i.e. heard for the first time) by the acknowledged masters, the 10 programmes were unusually rich. For instance: 2 symphonies by Haydn, 1 do. by Mozart, 1 do. by Gade, 1 do. by Raff (new man), and 1 by Schubert‐Joachim were given for the first time. Of overtures: Weber’s “Rubezahl”, a concert overture by Gade, Mendelssohn’s “Athalie” and overture for wind instruments, Schubert’s “Alfonso und Estrella”, Taubert’s “Arabian Nights”, and Cherubini’s “Lodoiska”, were announced for the first time. An oboe concerto by Handel, a clarinet concerto by Weber, violoncello do. by Goltermann, 1 piano do. by Mozart (not given) 1 piano do. by Rubinstein, piano do. (2nd time) by N. Burgmüller. A few of the novelties promised were found impracticable when the time came, and had to be reserved for future opportunities. But the number of compositions in all forms given for the first time in these 10 concerts amounts to 22 out of 53 in all; and 8 more were heard only for the second time, while of the favorite old standard works (not new) the list shows: Beethoven: 3 symphonies, 4 overtures, 2 concertos, 1 Prometheus Ballet piece; Cherubini: 2 overtures; Mozart: 1 concert aria, 1 concerto; Bach: 1 suite, 1 toccata; Schumann: 1 symphony, 1 concerto, 1 overture, 1 scherzo, 1 entr’acte; Schubert: 1 overture; Mendelssohn: 1 symphony, 1 concerto, 1 scherzo; Gade: 1 overture; Weber: 1 overture; Chopin: 1 concerto. The announcement (provisional) of the whole course of programme just before the subscription was opened to the public evidently drew eager attention to the concerts . . . [The financial gain] is not so large a gain as we have commonly had; that of last year, for instance, was nearly three times as large. But for such a season, with more than all the competition, surfeit and distraction which had been anticipated, and with the reduction of the price of tickets, it shows a most encouraging success. No other local concert‐giving institution, we are sure, has held its own so well; certainly not the Thomas concerts, nor, with the exception of a few evenings, the oratorios. Even had we lost a little it need not have discouraged us. We probably should have seen no reason to give up our journey, even had we lost a day by rain . . . The public rehearsals, which it was thought advisable to give both with the hope of benefit to the musicians (as so much more inducement in good artists to remain in ) and for the gratification and instruction of such of our subscribers as are eager to hear the symphonies, etc., more than once, have not been so well attended as the committee had hoped. They gave us one more rehearsal of each programme, which no doubt improved the rendering of the music to the full worth of the regular orchestral wages paid for it; and after paying for the hall, etc., there still remained a small surplus for the musicians.

Sale of tickets for 10 rehearsals $795.00 Cost (not including musicians’ pay) $568.79 Net gain for orchestra $226.21

. . . Your committee feel that they may safely claim that musically, artistically, and in respect to the pure and refined pleasure they have given, this last has been the best of all the seven series of our concerts. Never before has so much general satisfaction been expressed; never has so large an audience listened more attentively and with such evident delight; if some exception must be made in regard to one or two programmes, where Liszt’s “Tasso”, or one or two other questionable things, called forth unpleasant comment, this was the very lesson intended to be illustrated by the momentary deviation from the strong, main, wholesome current of the concerts, and will be the best protection against danger of that kind in future. One sign was quite remarkable: the changed and uncommonly respectful and appreciative attitude of the leading critics of the press towards our concerts. It was in strong contrast with the indifferent or carping tone which the same journals used towards us for two or three years preceding. Each Harvard Symphony concert has been discussed with interest and careful aim at some exactness of statement, as if it were an important artistic event. The motive and intention of the programmes, the inner rationale of their composition, has been sought and found by some of these writers (for the first time apparently) and has received due credit. And the marked improvement of the orchestra, both in the selection of its material and in the thorough drill to which it has been subjected, has been the general theme of praise. It was clearly shown that fifty‐five men could play as well as sixty‐five, and better. The return of Mr. Eichberg to his old place at the head of the violins was a positive gain in all respects, and an addition of so much weight of character both musical and personal. Our violoncellos were both more numerous and better than those of Thomas. The wind instruments have shown great improvement. Complaints against the boisterous blasts of the trombones and other brass have ceased. Our first flute and first clarinet were already admirable; and this time we have been almost equally fortunate in a first oboe—most difficult of all instruments to obtain and most indispensable. How to keep such musicians in Boston is the problem. Ten symphony concerts will not support a first rate oboist or clarinettist; and without some multiplication of such concerts they must go a‐begging for employment— perhaps play in bands or in poor theatres to the demoralization of their artistic tone and temper. Often, for this reason, at the close of our concert season, it has happened that one or more of our best musicians has been wanting when we looked for him again; he having betaken himself to New York or some city where he would find employment all the year round. In view of this difficulty it becomes a question whether we cannot take some means of continuing the season of orchestral concerts for a few months longer in the year. Could we not, for instance, supplement the regular fortnightly series of 10 concerts with 10 more, to be given weekly, with few rehearsals, repeating many of the best works, so that the cost would be comparatively small, and obtaining subscriptions before hand (to some extent) for either one or both of the two series? To some extent, to be sure, the same end is gained (so far as employment of wind instrument players is concerned) by the excellent concerts in a small hall now in progress under the direction of one of our own members. Possibly some co‐operation might be found desirable and practicable. At all events, it may be well and certainly can do no harm if the Concert Committee for another year should have authority to consider the problem with a view to its best practical solution. We presume there is no need of argument to convince anyone that the symphony concerts in their spirit, plan and realization thus far, have been of real service to the cause of music in this community and country; that they have upheld the standard of pure and noble Art more faithfully and more efficiently than any other of our musical institutions; that they have steadily improved in quality year by year, showing that they have been governed by the true conditions of success and permanence; and that the good work which this Association has thus been doing is worthy of continuance. Whether we can do more of the same sort may be open to question; but to think of doing any less would be a reckless throwing away of golden opportunities and an abandonment of a high trust. But the direct benefit which these concerts have been to our Association itself, the increase of means and power which they have given us for all our objects, is one the amount of which perhaps is not realized by most of our members. A brief summary of the earnings and appropriations for the seven years (supposing the recommendation of the committee to be followed in the appropriation this year) will show it. Net gain from 7 seasons of concerts $13,616.81 Appropriated to the library $4822.24 and music (orch. parts) at least $750.00 $ 5,572.24

“ to Concert Fund (with int. to date) $ 7,000.00 “ to general expenses of the Assoc. (?) $ 2,000.00

Had no portion of what was originally intended for the Concert Fund been diverted to other uses, that fund would now, with the accumulation of interest, amount to full $10,000.00. So long, therefore, as the symphony concerts are continued with the same success, the Harvard Musical Association will have power. And while it has power, may it always use it as well (to say the least) as it has done!

During the seventh season there were two concerts devoted to a special purpose besides the usual annual complimentary one to Zerrahn. The first was a “Grand Sacred Concert” on Sunday, December 4 for the benefit of the wounded in the Franco‐German War. The participants were the “Harvard Symphony Orchestra, including all the leading musicians in the city, and a Grand Chorus of Male Singers, combining the Orpheus Musical Society, Concordia, Helvetia, Maennerchor. Singing Sections of the Turnverein, all of Boston, Concordia of East Cambridge, assisted by Madame Bertha Johannsen and Mr. Bernhard Listemann.” The conductor was of course Zerrahn and John K. Paine was at the organ. The second special concert was also in December in commemoration of the birth of Beethoven just a hundred years previous. One number on the programme was Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony in which the took part. Financially this seventh season continued the habit of being successful. The years of the red in the books, turned to black by the wise provision of the Concert Fund, were yet to come. The report of James Sturgis, the Committee Treasurer, for this season is lacking. Mr. Dwight’s figures, which sometimes were not always exactly the same, report receipts of $11,787.00 (not including receipts from the public rehearsals), the total cost $10,769.65, and the net gain $1017.35. There is no memorandum of how this net gain was distributed but undoubtedly the Library and the Concert Fund were not forgotten. The eighth season (1872‐73) was no less successful than its predecessors. Dwight’s report, which follows, discusses in certain particulars of the whole series.

The season has been in some respects exceptional. Our opening concert (Nov. 7) was followed in two days by the Great Boston Fire, which of course had its depressing influence on the succeeding concerts for some time. . Moreover, it was a winter of contagious disease for men and animals, of interrupted travel in our streets, of sense of poverty and general depression. During the first half of the winter the public mind was little in the mood for concerts or for any sort of public entertainments —at least where they cost money. It cou1d hardly be supposed that we should escape the common lot of concert‐givers. It was a bad season for all. Yet during that gloomy first half‐season the symphony concerts about paid their way, and fared better than the oratorios, the Thomas concerts, or in fact any others given in this city, with the exception of two or three in which peculiar “attractions” were combined only at the close of the season. The attendance, however, even during our first five concerts was uniformly large and cheering; even in days of storm and gloom it will be remembered that the first came on a very stormy day, when there were no horse cars running. It was always anticipated that there would be ups and downs. Boston wouldn’t be Boston if she allowed anything to go on in unvarying sunshine. The causes are clear enough. 1. Enormous increase of concert activity throughout the land. To Boston, one of the first results of its fame for music is to tempt all the speculating managers and virtuosos this way; “there’s business in it—we must have a share—grab it all if we can.” Shall we go into the competition? No. We never compete—we are out of the scramble. What we do is for Art’s sake, and we shall go and do it faithfully as long as we can, as well as we can, sure that our work is needed. 2. A better orchestra has been heard. Admit it. Is this a reason for not doing what we can to build up a good orchestra of our own? Must we depend wholly on chance visitors? on travelling speculative concert bands? Our orchestra has improved, greatly improved, in these eight years. The more employment we can make for it the more it will improve. And after all, does the Thomas Orchestra give us just what we want? It is the only real permanent orchestra in America, and can play, and execute better than any we can yet command. But are there not some things which we want full as much and which it does not give us? Does it give us programmes as good as our own? In anything except performances does it present a standard of true taste and culture? Are it’s programmes select and pure enough? are they short enough? is the chief stress laid upon the sterling, the classical, or on the questionable sensational element? Do they tend on the whole to promote what is or should be our chief end: the ensuring of permanent stated opportunities of hearing and enjoying and becoming impregnated with the music which is of all time and independent of mere fashion? We think the general voice of our subscribers would answer no! Do they give us concerts of the highest order at wholesome intervals throughout a season, and of that moderate length which is best suited to enjoyment and a good digestion? On the contrary, they come and crowd 6 or 8 concerts into a single week; while, for the sake of drawing in the greatest number and variety of listeners, they cram each programme with a medley of so many things and so incongruous that to a healthy musical appetite the surfeit is almost intolerable. What is wanting to our orchestra is multiplied engagements of the kind we give them. Could we give 20, 40 concerts in a year, instead of 10? Could we also organize summer garden concerts of a somewhat lighter character we might build up an orchestra composed of musicians making this their chief employment; we could then bind them to their work, rehearsals as well as public concerts. Then we should have an orchestra that Boston need not be ashamed of. 3. Have our concerts been “dull”? Certainly they have been made up of the same sort of material, of equal richness, equal variety, with our earlier seasons, and they were never declared dull (of course exceptions prove the rule). Moreover, in the execution, in the manner of presentation, there can be no question that the last series have been better than the first. But of course it is an uneasy world and soon tires of running after even a good thing. There are always, especially in matters of taste, clamorers for change, and commonly not much agreement as to the kind of change required. Some want new composers, Liszt and Wagner, Raff and Reinecke, and Brahms and Rubinstein. Others want almost always Beethoven. The one purely Beethoven programme of the winter, which some (even of the committee) called dull, drew much the largest audience of the season, and has called forth more expressions of enthusiasm than any other. Some want more singing; others are as strenuous for no singing at all. Some want more repetition of old things; others would like to have every programme offer a preponderance of music which they never heard before. This is a difficulty which only increases with the musical culture of the community. The more we know, the harder we are to satisfy; each has a pet notion of his own to be gratified. And as for novelty, among standard symphonies, concertos, overtures, the very fact that we have already had them nearly all repeatedly increases every year the difficulty of giving what is both new and at the same time the best. 4. Others are out of humor with the Music Hall—say it is too large for symphonies, for classical performances; and think such concerts should be for a more limited, select audience, in smaller halls, where none of the effect of sound would be swallowed up in space. But could such concerts be given at the price of a dollar? Not so, say those (probably the larger party) who desire to have this great pleasure and means of culture participated by as many as possible.

This season the Public Rehearsals, the proceeds of which were designed for members of the orchestra, resulted in a loss of $34.93. This result raised the question whether admitting the public to these rehearsals was advisable. The receipts for the season were $10,942.50, the expenses $10,113.97, leaving a net gain of $828.53. Of this gain $500 were appropriated to the Concert Fund and $328.53 to the Library, to be added to the $100 appropriated annually by the association. Thus far eight seasons of the Harvard Orchestra have been reported; all were successful artistically and financially. The next bulletin, if and when published will continue the story. * * * * THE NATIONAL PEACE JUBILEE OF 1869 The idea of a Jubilee to celebrate the end of the war originated in the fertile brain of Patrick Sarsfield Gilmore. Born in Dublin in 1829 and dying in Salem, Massachusetts, in 1892, he is best known as the conductor of a famous band bearing his name which travelled throughout the United States, Canada, an also . As bandmaster in the Federal army he had given, in 1864, a grand musical festival in New Orleans with a number of combined bands, introducing the novel feature of cannon shots to act as re‐enforcement in certain musical numbers. He had had, therefore, certain experience on which to plan in 1867 a National Peace Jubilee, the preparation of which took two years. This Jubilee, as Gilmore conceived it, was to excel any musical festival in the world. There was to be a chorus of 10,000 mixed voices and 20,000 children; an orchestra of 1000; a building constructed to hold 50,000 persons; accessories in the musical numbers to be cannon and bells; the Jubilee to continue at least three days. He spent months elaborating his plans, which were of immense stature, and it was two years before he saw their fruition. The astonishing—the amazing fact is that there was a fruition, that this extraordinary plan, created in the brain of a man of initiative ideas, of far vision, of marked business ability was carried out and realized in 1869 (and again in 1872) in a musical festival which was, as one person put it, “beyond belief”. And the whole story supports this verdict.

*The National Peace Jubilee of 1869 and the World Peace Jubilee of 1872, both held in Boston, are not allied to the Association and do not fit into the policy of the writer to discuss usually in these bulletins subjects that have at least a semblance, however slight, of being allied to it. On the other hand, these Jubilees were so amazing in their plans and so stupendous in their execution that they merit narrating as far as space permits for one topic. The story, even when greatly condensed, of the two Jubilees is too long for one bulletin and consequently the next bulletin will narrate the story of the World Peace Jubilee. The two illustrations in this bulletin are of the Coliseum, built especially for the National Peace Jubilee, rather bare and shed‐like externally but not so internally, erected at a large cost. The Coliseum built for the World Peace Jubilee was an improvement architecturally and. more ornamental, and similar illustrations of this will accompany the story of the second Jubilee. This “monstrous” project, as many he appealed to for moral as well as material help termed it, met for months with so many and varied obstacles that Gilmore was often discouraged to the depths of despair, but as he visualized the Jubilee as he planned in his resilient spirit rebounded to the heights of hope. The first person he consulted was a life‐long and usually sympathetic friend to whom he confided the chief features of his plan. “You are mad,” was the reply, “this is an insane idea.” This beginning was hardly encouraging. Evidently there must be a method of procedure: to classify those he would consult and select the most promising persons in each group: musicians, business and professional men, prominent writers on musical matters, the press, the Mayor, the Governor, and other influential citizens. One of these was Major Charles O. Rogers, proprietor of the Boston Journal. As Gilmore unfolded the enormousness of his plans, Rogers listened surprised, goggle‐eyed, and impatient. “Why,” he interrupted, “this is an idea for an Emperor and it would take an Emperor to carry it out.” When Gilmore mentioned four hundred thousand dollars as the probable cost Rogers exploded. “It is all nonsense,” he shouted. “Take my advice and don’t for a moment permit your mind to dwell on such a visionary scheme; it would end only in disaster and ruin. I tell you that, in my opinion, you will not find a man in the city of Boston, of any substance, who would be willing to endorse your idea or subscribe a dollar to aid you in carrying it out.” Momentarily depressed but undaunted, Gilmore sought other ears to listen to him but they proved to be only graves where were buried his plans and hopes. Evidently Boston was provincial; might be the place. So to New York he went. He prepared and had printed a hundred or more of a three page prospectus announcing the plan in essential details. A site for the immense Coliseum was always in his mind, and he saw it in Central Park. Before seeking pecuniary aid it was better to consider the musical features. Thomas Boesé of the Board of Education was important to see. When Boesé consulted the prospectus he did not trouble to read the details. When he read the headings—”1000 musicians— 10,000 mixed voices in oratorio chorus—20,000 school children—a building to hold 50,000 persons—the expense to be about two hundred thousand dollars” he had seen all he wanted and rose to his feet. “Beautiful! Wonderful!” he said, opening the door for Gilmore to depart. “As important business requires my immediate attention I must bid you good morning.” After other depressing interviews it became evident that New York was in a derisive and not a receptive mood. So back went Gilmore to Boston. *The chief item among various sources consulted in the preparation of this story is The History of the National Peace Jubilee and Great Musical Festival, written and published by P. S. Gilmore and sold by Lee and Shepard, 1871, 758 pp. The quoted passages are from this book. Many explanatory details are omitted through lack of space; the important facts are phrased baldly, with disregard of proper chronological coherence. Here in Boston, Fate, won by Gilmore’s tenacity and perseverance, turned the tables but determined that Gilmore should still wrestle with fatigue and depression. He believed it necessary to place the enterprise under the auspices of an influential organization that would give it a national character. The best organization seemed to be the Grand Army of the Republic, but on reading the prospectus and listening to Gilmore they immediately declined any connection with the scheme. The Handel and Haydn Society, another large organization, he felt should from its nature be favorably disposed, but the officers did not even finish reading the prospectus before they all, Secretary Loring B. Barnes excepted, flatly declined. Very different, however, were Gilmore’s interviews with men of his own profession. Carl Zerrahn, Julius Eichberg and others proved to be enthusiastic. Gilmore then got in touch with the press, on the understanding that the enterprise was to be considered a confidential matter, and was encouraged by approval and willingness to co‐operate at the proper time. A call on John Sullivan Dwight was frigidly met. “Mr. Dwight continued to read the marvellous tale before him, interlarding with painful groans the variety of monstrous musical features that filed along. . . and there were indications that anger and wrath would fall upon the head of him who dared attempt the preparation of such an incomprehensible feast.” Dwight, who was always the gentleman, conquered his wrath but politely bowed Gilmore out. To one who worshipped only “true Art” (always with a capital) this enterprise was beyond belief. Later, at the annual dinner of the Harvard Musical Association, when nearly fifty members were present, “in a characteristic after‐dinner speech [he] indulged himself in a most bitter denunciation of the whole idea”. As a matter of fact, when the outlandish performance began Dwight packed his tooth brush and a few indispensables and fled to Nahant. It is only fair to add that when the Jubilee met with success he recanted and wrote an article of high praise for the New York Tribune. It was now time to approach men of means with the purpose of establishing a Guarantee Fund as large as possible with the promise of $1000 from each person, and a Subscription Fund of $100 from each subscriber. To William Gray, a prominent merchant, Gilmore presented his prospectus. At first Gray was favorably disposed (Gilmore had a persuasive tongue) but on consulting various friends who all declined Gray followed the sheep. Oliver Ditson called the scheme a “monstrous undertaking” and forthwith parted with Gilmore. Gilmore realized that only a properly organized method of approach could bring the matter before the business men, and, to accomplish this, 100 subscription books, with the prospectus included and labelled with the names of as many different branches of business, were prepared to be used by a member of the leading firm in each branch solicited to canvass his special trade. Curtis Guild, who was in sympathy with the enterprise, helped to get these properly distributed. Some solicitors got a fair number of subscriptions, but most of them got so few that they gave up the attempt. Meanwhile Gilmore was speaking before meetings of business men, the most important being the Commercial Club, the membership including the foremost local merchants. And he was making a good impression. George Coolidge, publisher of the Boston Almanac, printed a monthly magazine in the interest of the Jubilee and 50,000 copies were issued. But subscriptions continued to be few and objectors many. “These were dolorous days in the history of the Jubilee. . . An inclination to look upon the whole thing in the light of a burlesque prevailed to quite an extent. People seemed to think that a musical festival upon the immense scale proposed would be nothing more than a grand confusion of sounds, a terrific noise, a perfect bedlam which would deafen all who should come within hearing distance.” To cite further depressing interviews with objectors, the derisive and even contemptuous reception of his prospectus, the flat rejections in short and violent retorts would take space this bulletin cannot provide. Only a person with Gilmore’s tenacity, unlimited optimism, and faith in a project would have continued in the face of threatening failure. The tables, however, were turning and prospects of success began to dispel the gloom. In the course of months the important people slowly became favorable. It is more important to mention a few of the successful efforts than to continue with the failures. It was very necessary for Gilmore to consider the financial aspects: guarantors, subscribers, costs, and many details. The number of guarantors—$1000 each—slowly increased. The subscribers—at $100 each—grew in number until, at the end, there were about 300. This subscription of $100 entitled the subscriber to admittance and reserved seats for three persons to all entertainments. The first guarantor was Henry Mason of Mason and Hamlin Company. Thomas E. Chickering of Chickering and. Sons was the second. Eben D. Jordan backed and filled but finally filled. He called a meeting of sixty influential men and $14,000 was immediately subscribed by them. Jordan became so interested and felt such faith in the enterprise that he consented to become Treasurer. His acceptance was good advertising. A National Peace Jubilee Association was formed, and Alexander H. Rice, a prominent individual and late member of Congress, became President. Henry G. Parker, also prominent locally accepted the position of Secretary. This Association elected eight committees: Executive, Finance, Building, Music, Decorations, Advertising and Printing, Invitations and Reception, Reception of Members of the Press. In addition a General Committee of 84 members was chosen. Numerous letters of approval were given to Gilmore to be used as persuasives for the scheme and to obtain financial promises. They came from Rice, Charles G. Green of the Boston Post, Frank Wrisley, proprietor of the Tremont House and the Revere Hotel, Mayor Nathaniel B. Shurtleff, Lieut. Governor Claflin (he also subscribed $1000), Governor Alexander H. Bullock and others. The elite of Boston were caught through Mrs. Harrison Gray Otis.

Mrs. Harrison Gray Otis, having carefully examined Mr. P. S. Gilmore’s programme for “A Grand Peace Concert” on Boston Common in the leafy month of June next; and believing that, notwithstanding its colossal proportions the result will prove abundantly harmonious and a decided success in his unfailing hands, —charity and musick blending, —begs to have her name added to the list of subscribers. 41 Mt. Vernon St. 7th January, 1869

Gilmore persuaded the press, as a next step in publicity, to print from time to time mysterious and exciting bits of news of something important soon to take place. Certain magazines wrote explanatory articles—Harpers and Frank Leslies, for instance. An effort to interest the New York dailies met with opposition, with the Tribune particularly bitter in its editorial columns. Another preliminary step was the appointment of a Bureau of Accommodations to arrange with the hotels for accommodations for thousands of visitors. In short, the prospect of success, so infernally slow in starting, began rapidly to mount. The invited guests included President Grant (present at the second day of the Jubilee concerts), Vice President Colfax, Speaker of the House James G. Blaine, all the Cabinet officers, Judges of the Supreme Court, Representatives of Foreign Courts, Massachusetts members of Congress, officers of the Army and the Navy, Governors of states, Mayors of seven Massachusetts cities, and of the principal cities in the United States. Meanwhile, and for months, Gilmore had been busy on plans for organizing the chorus, selection of conductors and soloists, the orchestra, the music to be performed, selection of a site for the Coliseum and of an architect, and the erection of this huge building. To organize a chorus of 10,000, plus 20,000 school children was far from an easy matter. Invitations were sent to over a hundred choral societies all over the country. A Superintendent was necessary. Loring B. Barnes, Secretary of the Handel and Haydn Society, who had warmly endorsed the enterprise, was asked to organize the chorus. But Mr. Barnes side‐stepped; he had changed his mind. “. . . he found that many of the ‘high‐art circle’. . . were bitterly opposed to the whole idea. . . ‘Stand aloof’ was the watch word. ‘We must not give the slightest aid or encouragement or enter into any entangling alliances . . . with muffled tongues let its doom be tolled. The throes of death are already upon it, and we shall soon hear its last despairing gasp.’” The Handel and Haydn Society refused flatly to undertake the organization. Finally Eben Tourjée, Director of the Conservatory of Music, accepted the task and became Director of the Chorus. Very capably he executed his duties. The applicants for the chorus, hundreds and hundreds, were each auditioned and many, to their loud protests, rejected. The 20,000 school children could be obtained only by consent of the School Board. Dr. J. B. Upham, Chairman of the Music Committee on the Board, and Julius Eichberg argued in favor of the plan. But the Board hesitated. The participation of these youthful singers was scheduled for the concert of the first day. The building, the Board suspected, might collapse. But if it had not collapsed in four days, said Upham, it would probably continue erect for a fifth day. On an agreement to introduce the children on the last day the Board consented. The organization of an orchestra of 1000, the details of which are omitted, was placed in the efficient hands of Thomas Baldwin. Musicians applied from cities far west of Boston and even from the Canadian Provinces. The music was printed by Oliver Ditson and Company, but several orchestral scores were of necessity imported from . The largest bass drum (of 20 altogether) was a curiosity. It measured 8 feet in diameter and 25 feet in circumference; it bore the motto “Let Us Have Peace.” Placed on exhibition in a store window it was viewed by hundreds. To give a literary touch to the occasion a poem was considered desirable. Naturally Longfellow was chosen, but it appeared he was in Europe. Oliver Wendell Holmes, however, consented to fill his shoes. When the question of the site for the Coliseum came up the unanimous choice of the Association was the Parade Ground on Boston Common, and the Board of Aldermen rather thoughtlessly granted the petition for its use. When this fact became known exceedingly loud was the public clamor against the “desecration” of land belonging to the people. Few were in favor; many were violently opposed; the newspapers devoted columns to letters from indignant remonstrants. William Gray presented a petition against such use of the Common signed by 650 persons. With some haste the Aldermen rescinded their vote; a notice to that effect was hurriedly put in the papers by Mr. Parker to make known the changed idea of a harassed Association Committee. Finally Gilmore suggested St. James Park. This park stretched west from Dartmouth Street, and the building when erected extended from Copley Square to the railroad, bounded on the north by Boylston Street and on the south by Huntington Avenue. Through all the stream of obstacles and opposing forces, Jordan, wrote Gilmore, “stood at the helm with unflinching determination.” The story of the Coliseum, even in this long but much condensed narrative, should not be omitted. The first consideration was the price of admittance and this the Committee set at $5 and $3 for reserved seats, $2 for standing room, for each performance. Incidentally, fortunately for the guarantors, the receipts were sufficient to pay the entire cost of the Jubilee and not one of the $1000 pledges was called. Obstacles in the erection of this huge building were not escaped. Gilmore wrote that “it would take the physical power of a Hercules, the eloquence of a Demosthenes, and the patience of a job to succeed in obtaining the necessary material and get the building erected.” Francis Allen was the architect with Gridley G. F. Bryant as consulting architect. The foundations were not on piles but each post rested on a platform 8 feet square and 18 inches thick formed of planks 4 inches thick. The structure was of wood, the aggregate of lumber used being 2,500,000 feet. It was 500 feet long, 300 feet wide, with the front on Boylston Street, and it covered three quarters of an acre. The upright walls were 36 feet high; the apex of the roof was 100 feet from the ground. Movable windows 5 feet high let in daylight and air. A ventilator 20 feet wide and 6 feet high ran the length of the building. About 7,500 pounds of paint were used on the exterior, requiring 200 days labor to put on. Twelve guns, manned by selected gunners, stood forty rods west of the Coliseum; forty big bells pealed when called on; and all were set off at the appropriate moment in the rendition of a musical number by an electric signal from the conductor. And what’s more—the timing was perfect. During the performance of the Star Spangled Banner the guns were discharged 26 times, while the bells jangled. So thrilled was the audience that the piece was repeated. In fact every piece on the programme that called on these accessories had to be repeated. Repeated also was the Anvil Chorus, when 100 firemen, in red shirts, white caps, and black trousers, lustily banged the 100 large, heavy anvils.

The interior was not painted but the walls were tinted and panelled in fresco and hung with curtains and draperies. Over 25,000 feet of gas pipe fed 2400 jets fashioned in the form of stars and other appropriate figures. Four galleries were above the parquet—the latter occupying the space between the galleries—with no seats under them, this space being devoted to the standees. About two fifths of the building was occupied by the orchestra and the chorus. The space for the orchestra was 100 feet deep and 115 feet wide, the chorus on three sides. The organ, standing behind the chorus, was constructed by E. & G. G. Hook, and was a powerful instrument in its sound. There was only one manual, with 21 stops of a loud nature, the pedal organ had 4 stops, and there were 4 combination pedals. From the podium five speaking tubes extended to the chorus and the orchestra with a marshal at each to transmit messages from the conductor. Under the rear part of the balconies were various rooms: for the press, for the committees, for refreshments, for the reception of invited guests (elaborated with heavy carpeting, stuffed black walnut furniture, fourteen rustic baskets filled daily with flowers, fine paintings on the walls. Here, at the second concert, after he had bowed hurriedly to a shouting audience, sat President Grant, smoking a cigar while the concert continued), rooms for various bands, ante‐rooms for the chorus, space for the fire engine, smaller apartments for ticket sellers, vendors of librettos, opera glasses, etc.

The walls of the Coliseum were decorated with emblems typifying Peace. At one end was a figure of Peace 13 feet high; at the opposite end and over the organ was an arch of 50 feet span; in its centre upon a medallion 6 feet in diameter floated a white dove, and on each side stood the figure of an angel 18 feet high, with appropriate mottoes. On the columns were portraits and names of Mozart, Rossini, Handel, Haydn, Beethoven, Mendelssohn, Balfe, and Schubert. Another medallion bore the figure of David playing upon a harp; another the figure of St. Cecilia at the organ; other medallions were appropriately decorated. Upon certain columns were the coat‐of‐arms of 37 states with national emblems and flags. On the central double lines of columns were the flags of every nation on the globe. In this enormous building a monstrous programme of music was performed before a monstrous audience. And the surprising fact in the whole performance is that everything went off O.K.! For the original idea, for the long and discouraging work in securing moral and financial aid, for planning various items, for activity in every detail—in short, for success, credit should go to P. S. Gilmore even when acknowledgment is given to various necessary committees of excellent personnel. Certain statistics should be recorded. The chorus represented 103 choral societies, some in distant cities as in Chicago, San Francisco, and in Canada. These singers numbered 10,404: 3219 sopranos, 2512 altos, 1968 tenors, 2597 basses, 108 artists and leading singers. The orchestra (with the celebrated Ole Bull as leader) and the military band comprised 1014 persons. There were 700 representatives of the press The guarantors were not called on to pay a cent. Over 300 persons subscribed $100 (some $200, $300) with the privileges already mentioned. The total receipts from subscriptions, ticket sales, rent of rooms, etc. were $290,270.33. The disbursements were as follows:

Cost of Coliseum $120,758.68 Musicians and Vocalists 79,866.65 Advertising 27,298.96 Board and lodging of musicians 26,200.85 Decorations 11,170.12 Music and printing 5,533.94 Organ 3,000.00 Doorkeepers, etc 2504.31 Incidentals 7562.78

283,388.29 The credit balance of $6882.04 was added to the proceeds of a benefit concert to Gilmore of $32,146, and the combined total or $39,028.04 was presented to him. The programmes, which carried the titles of vocal and instrumental music known to even the least musically educated, are the final word in the story of an amazing enterprise. Each concert began at 3 o’clock. The conductors were Carl Zerrahn, Julius Eichberg, and P. S. Gilmore. The organist was Dr. John H. Willcox, who had a wide reputation for his skill on the organ. The Superintendent and Director of the Chorus was Eben Tourjée. FIRST DAY, JUNE 15 Part 1 Prayer by the REV. EDWARD EVERETT HALE ADDRESS by the HON. N. B. SHURTLEFF, Mayor, welcoming Guests and Visitors. ADDRESS by the HON. ALEXANDER H. RICE, on the Restoration of Peace and Union.

1. CHORAL. “God is a castle and defence.” ...... LUTHER. (With Organ and Orchestral accompaniment.) 2. OVERTURE. “Tannhaüser.” ...... MOZART. 3. GLORIA. From the “Twelfth Mass.” ...... MOZART. 4. SOLO. “Ave Maria.” ...... GOUNOD. Sung by MADAME PAREPA ROSA. (The Violin obligato by two hundred violinists.) 5. NATIONAL AIR. “The Star Spangled Banner” (With an additional verse, by W. T. BALL, Esq.) (By the Chorus, with Orchestra, Organ, Military Band, Drum Corps, Chiming of Bells, and Artillery accompaniments.)

INTERMISSION OF FIFTEEN MINUTES.

PART II

1. HYMN OF PEACE (Written for the occasion by DR. OLIVER WENDELL HOLMES, to the music of “Keller’s American Hymn.” By the chorus, with Organ and full Orchestral accompaniment.)

Angel of Peace, thou hast wandered too long! Spread thy white wings to the sunshine of love! Come, while our voices are blended in song,— Fly to our ark like the storm beaten dove! Fly to our ark on the wings of the dove,— Speed o’er the far‐sounding billows of song, Crowned with thine olive‐leaved garland of love,— Angel of Peace, thou hast waited too long!

Brothers we meet on this altar of thine, Mingling the gifts we have gathered for thee, Sweet with the odors of myrtle and pine, Breeze of the prairie and breath of the sea,— Meadow and mountain and forest and sea! Sweet is the fragrance of myrtle and pine, Sweeter the incense we offer thee, Brothers once more round this altar of thine.

Angels of Bethlehem, answer the strain! Hark! a new birth song is filling the sky! Loud as the storm‐wind that tumbles the main Bid the full breath of the organ reply,— Let the loud tempest of voices reply,— Roll its long surge like the earth‐shaking main! Swell the vast song till it mounts to the sky! Angels of Bethlehem, echo the strain!

2. OVERTURE. “William Tell.” ...... ROSSINI. 3. SOLO. “Inflammatus” from the “Stabat Mater.” ...... ROSSINI. Sung by MADAME PAREPA ROSA. 4. CORONATION MARCH, from “The Prophet.” ...... MEYERBEER. (By the full Band of one thousand instrumentalists.) 5. SCENA, from “II Trovatore,” introducing the Anvil Chorus...... VERDI. (By the Chorus, with full Band, Chiming of Bells, etc. The Anvil part to be performed by one hundred members of the Fire Department.) 6. NATIONAL AIR. “My Country ‘tis of thee.” Words by Rev. S. F. Smith, D.D. (By the Chorus, with Orchestra, Military Band, Drum Corps, Chiming of Bells, and Artillery accompaniments.)

SECOND DAY, JUNE 16. GRAND CLASSICAL PROGRAMME. SYMPHONY AND ORATORIO. CONDUCTOR, CARL ZERRAHN.

PART I. 1. FESTIVAL OVERTURE, based on Luther’s Choral “Ein feste burg.” ...... NICOLAI.

2. a. CHORUS. “Glory to God in the highest,” from the “Messiah” ...... HANDEL. b. CHORUS. “And the glory of the Lord shall be revealed,” from the “Messiah.” ....HANDEL.

3. RECITATIVE AND ARIA, Non piu di fiori, from “La Clemenza di Tito.” ...... MOZART. Sung by MISS ADELAIDE PHILLIPS. 4. CHORUS. “He watching over Israel,” from “Elijah.” ...... MENDELSSOHN. 5. AIR. “Let the bright seraphim.” ...... HANDEL. Sung by MADAME PAREPA ROSA. 6. DUET AND CHORUS. “See the Conquering Hero comes,” from “Judas Maccabaeus.” [verses omitted here] ...... HANDEL.

INTERMISSION OF FIFTEEN MINUTES.

PART II. 1. SYMPHONY (in C major.) ...... SCHUBERT. Andante, Allegro, Andante con moto, Scherzo, Finale. 2. a. SOLO AND CHORUS. “The marvellous work,” from “The Creation.” ...... HAYDN. The solo by MADAME PAREPA ROSA. b. CHORUS AND TRIO. “The heavens are telling,” from “The Creation.” ...... HADYN.

THIRD DAY, JUNE 17. ANNIVERSARY OF THE BATTLE OF BUNKER HILL. PATRIOTIC AND MILITARY PROGRAMME. CONDUCTOR, P. S. GILMORE. PART I. 1. OVERTURE. “Fra Diavolo.” ...... AUBER. Arranged for Orchestra of One Thousand Performers, Fifty Trumpeters performing the solo part. 2. CHORAL. “Judgment Hymn.” ...... LUTHER. Chorus, Organ and Orchestra. 3. GRAND MARCH. “Peace Festival.” ...... JANOTTA Composed for this occassion, and arranged for Grand Orchestra and Military Band combined. 4. ARIA, Robert, toi qui j’aime ...... MEYERBEER. Sung by MADAME PAREPA ROSA. 5. SCENA, from “Il Trovatore,” introducing the Anvil Chorus...... VERDI. With Chorus, Band of One Thousand, One Hundred Anvils, several Drum Corps, Artillery, Bells, etc. The Anvil part will be performed by One Hundred Members of the Boston Fire Department. 6. OVERTURE TRIOMPH, on the American National Air, “Hail Columbia.” ...... C. C. CONVERSE. Introducing the Full Chorus, accompanied by the Orchestra, Military Band, and other accompaniments.

INTERMISSION OF FIFTEEN MINUTES. PART II.

1. MARCHE MILITAIRE. “Prince Frederick.” ...... BILSE. Band of One Thousand Performers.

2. NATIONAL AIR. “The Star Spangled Banner” Sung by MADAME PAREPA ROSA, with Chorus and Orchestral accompaniment. 3. ARIA FOR TRUMPET, from “Il Bravo.” ...... MERCADANTE. Performed by M. ARBUCKLE, with Orchestra accompaniment. 4. THE HARP THAT ONCE THRO’ TARA’S HALLS ...... MOORE. Arranged for Full Chorus, Grand Orchestra, Military Band and Organ. 5. OVERTURE. “Stradella.” ...... FLOTOW. Reed Band of Five Hundred Performers. 6. CHORAL. One Hundredth Psalm. Chorus, Organ, Orchestra, Military Band, etc. The audience is respectfully invited to join in the last verse.

FOURTH DAY, JUNE 18. ORATORIO AND SYMPHONY. CONDUCTOR, P. S. GILMORE. PART I. 1. OVERTURE. “Jubilee.” ...... WEBER. 2. CHORAL. “To God on High.” From “St. Paul.” ...... MENDELSSOHN. 3. SYMPHONY No. 5 (in C minor.) ...... BEETHOVEN. Allegro molto, Andante con moto, Scherzo allegro, Finale allegro. 4. ARIA. “Lascia chio pianga.” ...... HANDEL. Sung by MISS ADELAIDE PHILLIPS. 5. CHORUS. “Achieved is the glorious work.” From “The Creation.” ...... HAYDN. 6. CHORUS. “Thanks be to God” From “Elijah.” ...... MENDELSSOHN.

INTERMISSION OF FIFTEEN MINUTES.

PART II. 1. CHORUS. “Sleepers wake, a voice is calling.” From “St. Paul.” ...... MENDELSSOHN. 2. PRAYER, from “Moses in Egypt.” ...... ROSSINI. 3. SOLO AND CHORUS. “Inflammatus.” From “Stabat Mater.” ...... ROSSINI. (The Solo by the leading Soprani, in Concert.) 4. GLORIA, from “Twelfth Mass.” ...... MOZART. 5. HALLELUJAH CHORUS, from the “Messiah.” ...... HANDEL.

FIFTH DAY, JUNE 19 Concert by the children of the Public Schools, commencing at 11 o’clock A.M. With full orchestral accompaniment, being the largest chorus of children ever brought together. The whole under the management of the Music Committee of the Boston School Committee. CONDUCTOR, JULIUS EICHBERG. ORGANIST, J. B. SHARLAND. 1. Organ Introduction during the entrance of the children. 2. OVERTURE. “Tannhäuser.” ...... WEBER. Grand Orchestra. 3. “Hail Columbia.” Full Chorus, Grand Orchestra and Organ. 4. “NOW THE TWILIGHT’S SOFTLY STEALING.”...... MERCADANTE. Full Chorus, in 3 parts, Orchestra and Organ. [Verses omitted here.] 5. “SO MERRILY O’ER THE OCEAN.” ...... BRINLEY RICHARDS. Solo parts by 500 voices from the Normal Schools. Full Chorus, in 3 parts, by Pupils of the Grammar Schools. With Grand Orchestra and Organ. [Verses omitted here.] 6. CHORAL. “A Strong Castle.” ...... LUTHER. [Verse omitted here.]

INTERMISSION. During which Exercises in Physical and Vocal Culture will be performed under Prof. L. B. Munroe. 7. JUBAL OVERTURE...... WEBER. Grand Orchestra. 8. RUSSIAN NATIONAL HYMN “God the All Merciful.” Full Chorus, Orchestra and Organ. 9. “WAKE, GENTLE ZEPHYR.” ...... ROSSINI. Full Chorus, in 3 parts, Grand Orchestra and Organ. [Verses omitted here.] 10. THE ONE HUNDREDTH PSALM. Full Chorus, Grand Orchestra and Organ. The audience are invited to join in the last verse. [Verses omitted here.] The three soloists were celebrated. Mme. Parepa Rosa was well known in Europe for her remarkable voice; Miss Phillips was noted for her beautiful and powerful contralto voice; Arbuckle had no peer on the trumpet * * * * * Edward Burlingame Hill, H. ‘94, (summa cum laude for highest honors in music) needs no introduction. He joined the Department of Music, Harvard College, in 1908; he was Chairman for a number of years; and resigned from the Faculty in 1940. His orchestral, choral and other compositions have been performed by the Boston Symphony Orchestra and elsewhere. He was a Vice President of this Association for some years and for a long time a member of the Library Committee. He is now one of five Honorary Members. Since his retirement from Harvard he is living on his estate in New Hampshire. The writer—no less than the reader appreciates his kindness in preparing for this issue an article, which follows.

A MATTER OF TASTE At times one is tempted to question the ultimate value of musical criticism as exhibited in our daily press. Aside from a scant financial return earned under distressing conditions which almost preclude a temperate judgment, many journalists who occupy a subordinate position must either be content with reviewing a somewhat mediocre concert or even be compelled to “cover” at the height of a “metropolitan season” several in a single evening. Their chief may choose an occasion which in their own idiom is more “rewarding”, but even then the hour of “going to press” is immutable in its demands. Does this necessity sharpen the critic’s power of appraisal or tend to furnish a perspective which is essential when faced with a serious work of art? M. Vincent d’Indy, who often found himself simultaneously faced with praise and blame, once wrote (I quote from memory): “I cannot see how the fact that Mr. So and So liked or did not like a work helps to advance the growth of musical art.”

* The writer expresses his appreciation of the co‐operation of Mr. Richard G. Appel, Chief of the Music Department of the Boston Public Library (and a member of the Association), in putting at his disposal certain publications in the Department. Musical criticism reached the fledgling stage with Carl Maria Von Weber despite his extraordinarily derogatory statements about Beethoven’s music. Thus on Beethoven’s third and fourth symphonies we find these opinions: “His fervid almost incredible inventive powers are accompanied by so much confusion in the arrangement of his ideas that his early works alone interest me; the later ones are to me a bewildering chaos, an obscure straining after novelty, lit up it is true by divine flashes of genius, which only show how great he might be if he would only curb his riotous imagination.” It should be acknowledged that von Weber atoned for these harsh strictures by unqualified homage before the composer of “Fidelio.” Robert Schumann was the pioneer critic among composers who exhibited breadth of sympathy and penetration into the musical content of his contemporaries. He was perhaps the first to appreciate the nationalistic fervor, the harmonic originality and the intensely novel piano style of Chopin’s piano music. Beginning with the early variations on Mozart’s La ci darem la mano, continuing with the études, the ballades, the mazurkas, the polonaises, and the concertos, his estimates are the more extraordinary since they grasped the very essence of an individuality, so different from his own. Later, Schumann’s essay, “New Paths,” concerned with the early works of the twenty year old Brahms, has been so often quoted as scarcely to need more than a mention here. But it may be noted that Schumann foresaw from the outset the adherence to classic style despite Brahms’ pronounced romanticism, where the more impetuous Liszt fancied that he discerned a trend towards radicalism in the Scherzo, Op. 4. Following Schumann, Berlioz, Liszt and Wagner advanced the status of the composer‐critic despite some all but incomprehensible idiosyncracies of judgment. For instance, Berlioz, disliking Haydn and Mozart, has scarcely been surpassed in his profound understanding of Beethoven. Yet he wrote in a flippant mood: “When I was in St. Petersburg they played me a fugue by Bach. I do not think they intended to annoy me.” Liszt, too long prone to making dazzling fantasies on current French and Italian operas to meet the tastes of the public, championed Wagner’s cause at the height of the latter’s unpopularity. Wagner, the fervent adherent of Gluck, von Weber and Beethoven, went out of his way to disparage the music of Brahms whom he characterized as “a wooden Messiah.” During later generations the history of music provides so many instances of erroneous judgments upon contemporaneous musical art as to strain credibility. They are so numerous as entirely to transcend the scope of this article. A few of them may be referred to. Johann Mattheson, the friend and admirer of Handel, has greatly enriched our understanding of eighteenth century music art in a series of valuable treatises. How inexplicable that, in a species of dictionary concerned with composers of his day, he omitted a biography of Johann Sebastian Bach, and even dismissed his melodies as “peculiar.” But even Bach’s sons, while recognizing their father’s phenomenal technical attainments, quite failed to fathom his inventive genius as a composer. Wagner, the center of acrid controversy almost to the nineteenth century, furnished two outstanding failures in the field of musical criticism in the persons of H. F. Chorley in England and Eduard Hanslick in Vienna. An astounding record of comprehensive critical, invective reached a climax in Wilhelm Tappert’s “A Wagner Lexicon” listing with Teutonic thoroughness the terms of abuse applied to Wagner and his music. Unfortunately this “lexicon” is not easily available for confirmation. The likes and dislikes of the average musical listener, in common with many a field of human activity, whether they are applied to literature, drama, sculpture or painting, is rooted in obstinate conservatism. Nor is this indeed confined to the amateur. The human race is inclined to distrust change of any sort because it involves re‐ education and above all earnest thought and application. In music each generation discovers its bugbear, whether it be Richard Strauss, Debussy, Scriabin, Schoenberg, Hindemith, Stravinsky or even Shostakovich. Fortunately, Time, the eternal rectifier, furnishes reverses to unthinking verdict. An age which has produced Henry Prunierès, Louis Laloy, N. D. Calvocoressi, Adolph Boschot in France; Hubert Parry, Donald Francis Tovey, Edward Dent and Ernest Newman in England; William Foster Apthorp, Philip Hale, James Huneker and Hugo Leichtentritt in the United States has, by their united labors, advanced the conscience of the critic. In the light of history, then, what does musical criticism of the daily journal accomplish for the casual or even the frequent concert‐goer? He may compare his own reaction as an amateur with that of the professional. As a rule he is not aware of the problems inherent in successful interpretation, of “method” as exhibited by superior instrumentalists. Thus he can scarcely profit by considerations of which he is unaware. To the composer, criticism may be accidentally instructive; but the odds are against this since the average critic is too little versed in the real problems of the composer. For the performer, musical criticism may prove invaluable provided that it contains a sufficiency of laudatory phrases which, apart from their context, may be assembled to form the basis of a prospectus which may impress a concert manager or the amateur organizer of entertainments to the point of obtaining profitable engagements. Since too many critics are lacking in a genuine background as a basis for sound judgment, the only valid remedy is to be found in musicology, which involves the study of music from an adequate historical standpoint, weighing the political, philosophical literary, musical and human environment of the composer. This will insure a more intelligent, poised and acid understanding of the sources of a composer’s product, an assay of the spiritual and emotional qualities which give it life. Musicology, long valued at its true worth in Europe where it constitutes the basis of opinion among the best critics, is beginning to take its proper place on this side of the Atlantic. Musicology tends to eliminate prejudice, a hasty and too often ill‐founded personal approach, and substitutes a foundation which gives depth and dignity to the critical function. EDWARD B. HILL * * * *

The following list contains most of the recent purchases and gifts since the issue of the last bulletin. The Library appreciates the generosity of donors.

PURCHASES Bach—3 Sonatas for cello (or viola) and piano. (Originally composed for viola da gamba) Lomax, John A. & Alan, coll. & arr.—The III Best American Ballads. Folk Song U. S. A. Gál—Huyton Suite for flute and 2 violins, score Porter—Quintet on a Childhood Theme for flute and string instruments, score Scholz—Andante and Allegro from First Orchestra Suite, score Ullrich—Trio—Phantasy for violin, horn and piano, op. 20 Byrd, Bull and others—Nine Fantasias in four parts. Ed. by Sydney Beck. Parts and score Mozart—Symphonies Nos. 19, 20, 30, 32‐36, 38‐41, full scores Rachmaninoff—Second Piano Concerto, op. 18. Orchestral accompaniment arr. for a second piano Randolph, ed.—Ozark Folksongs. Vols. 1, 2 Hindemith—Sonata for two pianos, four hands Handel—Overture to Acis and Galatea. Arr. for 2 pfs., 4 hds. Liszt—‐Valse Oubliée. Arr. for 2 pfs., 4 hds. Shostakovitch—Waltz, op. 30. From the film Golden Mountains. Arr. for 2 pfs., 4 hds. Haubeil—Five Pieces for five winds, score Vivaldi—XII Sonate per violino e basso, score Dessoff Choir Series—(6 numbers) Hayes, arr.—My Songs. Aframerican Religious Folk Songs

A Dictionary of Musical Themes—Barlow & Morgenstern, comp. Music in the Baroque Era. From Monteverdi to Bach—Manfred F. Bukofzer A Companion to Mozart’s Piano Concertos—Arthur Hutchings Stravinsky. A Critical Study—Eric W. White The Mighty Five. The Cradle of Russian National Music—Victor I. Seroff Essays on Music—Romain Rolland Chamber Music. The Growth and Practice of an Intimate Art—Homer Ulrich French Grand Opera. An Art and a Business—William L. Crosten The Little Dictionary of Musical Terms—Helen L. Kaufmann

GIFTS Three Choral Pieces for Women’s Voices (arr. by Dr. Carl Garabedian)—Gift of the arranger

From Mrs. Duncan Jenkins Forty‐nine compositions arranged for 2 pianos, 8 hands Twenty‐nine compositions arranged for 1 piano, 4 hands One composition arranged for 2 pianos, 4 hands CHARLES R. NUTTER