many excellent double ones of that time are omitted; and that no second edition has been published which might incorporate those of a later date.

The other work which we mentioned is such as no lover of sacred music should be without: and it is, in fact, its very goodness which puts it above being fitted for such a choir as we are imagining. A division for four voices is not wanted here, and will only be perplexing: moreover, the variety of chants will distract the mind, and be decidedly productive of a bad effect.

We think that among the thousand similar collections there is none we could, on the whole, recommend above Mr. Thomas Bennett's "Cathedral Selections." They contain thirty double and twenty-eight single chants (most of the latter we could, indeed, have dispensed with), several "commandments" and "Sanctuses," and a few easy anthems. The price of the work is only five shillings; so that it might be dispersed among those persons in the better classes of the parish to whom it might be useful, and whom it would enable with ease to join in chanting the psalms. Yet several beautiful chants are omitted, which we should be sorry were not generally known. Perhaps we shall be conferring a favour on some of our readers if we mention a few of those which we should recommend; and particularize also some of the psalms to which they are adapted:

Lord Mornington, in E; Russell, in E; Dupens, in A; Crotch's two, in C; Jones (which Haydn is said to have considered one of the most sublime musical ideas he knew) may be used for almost any psalm; so may also Boyce's two well known chants. A. Bennett's Minor is adapted most beautifully for any of the penitential psalms. If, however, it should be considered too difficult, its place may be tolerably supplied by Alcock. For Psalms 29, 37, 90, 107.

Beckwith.
Calah.
Soaper.

Goss, from Beethoven.

The foregoing may serve as specimens of the manner in which it is desirable to connect psalms with chants.

It is much to be lamented that so many beautiful chants, buried in the recesses of our cathedral organ lofts, should be entirely lost. We are ourselves in possession of several compositions by Ebdon, now preserved at Durham, which, were it allowed, would well repay the trouble and expense of publication. In fact, there is hardly a choir which does not possess some MS. chants that it would confer no small obligation on the lovers of sacred music to render more widely known. And this system of concealment is the more deeply to be regretted, because, so far as respects cathedral music, our lot is certainly thrown among "the days of little men." Exceptions here and there may be found; but the Camidges, the Walmisleys,* the Turles, the Bennetts, of our times, but ill supply the place of the Cookes, the Boyces, the Kents, the Hayeses, of former years.

We might, did time allow it, dwell on the careless manner in which the musical part of the service is performed in many of our cathedrals. The fines for the non-attendance of the choristers are not exacted; the organist too often permits his place to be filled up by a deputy; the selection of chants, services, and anthems, are frequently left almost to chance. But we have already lingered so long over this part of our subject that we must hasten to offer a few very brief observations on the psalm tunes most commonly in use.

The two collections which stand at the head of this article may serve as very good specimens of the different methods in which psalm tunes (as bearing respect for the different classes for whom they are intended) should be arranged. The former, to quote the words of the compiler, are such as are—

"Commonly sung in the churches of Cambridge and its vicinity. They have been used for several years in the parish church of Oakington, by a village congregation, sometimes without any accompaniment, and at others with only the aid of a flute, clarionet, or violoncello; and it is therefore presumed that they may be introduced without difficulty into other country congregations.

"The selector of tunes, and the leader of devotional harmony, has no easy task to perform. He must often yield that he may overcome; and must concede much in order that he may secure the assistance of

• Having mentioned Professor Walmisley's name, we may express our regret that he does not make public some of his sacred compositions. We consider him as (not excepting Camidge) the first chant writer of the present day; those who have heard them will not soon forget his "Quadruple" for the seventy-eighth Psalm, and his beautiful "Answer" to Goss, from Beethoven.

those, without whose aid psalmody cannot be congregational. Where the psalmody is conducted by a skilful organist, and a well-trained choir, the difficulty of selecting appropriate tunes is materially diminished; and it may fairly be expected that no composition should be introduced which is not arranged on scientific principles, and adapted to a refined ear. Yet, even in many metropolitan churches, the psalmody is almost confined to the shrill treble of the school children; while, in numerous instances, large congregations unite, as with one voice, in tunes which a cultivated taste would decidedly condemn...... Considerations of this kind have induced the compiler to admit some tunes, which, under other circumstances, would not have been inserted, and to omit others, which, though admirable in themselves, are not generally acceptable."

There is, doubtless, much that is true in the above remarks; yet, at the same time, we are of opinion, that the principle has been, in the work before us, carried rather too far. No consideration whatever would have induced us to admit such tunes as "Cambridge New," and the "Sicilian Mariners; " the former, better adapted to lead a country dance than to excite any devotion; and the latter, a sickly, sentimental, and languishing air, the author of which happily remains in that obscurity which he richly merits. We do not believe-at least, not to the extent which the passage we have just quoted seems to intimate—in the natural vitiations of musical taste which is imputed to our country congregations; we are rather inclined to think that any tune, of which the air is strikingly marked, will win their favour, simply because it is not beyond their power of comprehension. It is true that "Cambridge New" is very popular; but we believe "Magdalene" (the Evening Hymn), which, be it Tallis's or no, is certainly the work of a master, to be still more so; and both from the reason we have just given.

The whole volume contains eighty-eight psalm tunes, besides ten chants. Miss Cecil's volume is, as we have seen, arranged for four voices: the number of tunes it contains is thirty-nine; of which eight, namely, St. Margaret's, St. Clement's, St. Jerome's, St. Lawrence's, St. Bernard's, St. John's, St. Ambrose's, and St. Austin's, are the production of the Rev. Richard Cecil; and three, St. Tulsa's, St. Ignatius's, and St. Catharine's, of the compiler herself. This is, perhaps, rather too large a proportion of original compositions; though, at the same time, we are bound to own that they are most of them well worthy of the place they hold, and Št. Austin's and St. Margaret's may be considered first-rate in the class to which they belong.

A peculiarity in the manner of arrangement may be noticed in the words of the introduction:

"It has been suggested, by some friends, that preludes and interludes

annexed to the tunes would render the volume more acceptable; some have, therefore, been attempted, which may serve as hints for the extemporary performer to improve upon. These, however, being written with a view rather to private tlian public performance, are not, in every instance, confined to the gravity and brevity required in congregational singing. Whatever of this nature intermingles itself with the praises of God, if not exceedingly chastised in style and length, seems an unjustifiable interruption of the worship of the Church."

It is a circumstance worthy of notice, that in the multifarious collection of Rippon, probably not twenty psalm tunes could be pointed out, whose composers were distinguished for musical genius. The Rev. R. Cecil, of Long Stanton, Cambridgeshire, in a collection which he not long ago published, endeavoured to arrange the more celebrated airs under four classes, according to their various degrees of excellence. Without attempting so minute a scale, we think that those which may be fairly considered as of a first-rate character would not form a very long list. When we have named Burford, St. Margaret's, St. Anne's, St. Stephen's, the Evening Hymn, the Old Hundredth, Truro, Hanover, Haydn's, Hotham, Milton, St. Austin's, Tantum ergo, Adesté Fideles, Portsmouth, and Salzburg, we are not aware that we shall have been guilty of any material omission.*

The manner in which the psalmody is usually managed in our village congregations is a subject which it is painful to contemplate. An old man, who receives his forty shillings a year as clerk, in order that forty shillings a year may be spared to the parish books, is the person usually selected to lead the thanksgivings of the congregation; or, if he be assisted at all, it is by a full accompaniment of violin, violoncello, clarionet, and flute (and well if there be not some noisier instrument of music), from the village band, sufficient to banish every idea of melody from the minds of those who might otherwise take a part in the singing. Tunes of the most improper and ludicrous character are too frequently admitted: it is not many months since, in a church in Sussex, we heard the hymn attemptedthe attempt was, we admit, a failure-to the tune of "Here's a health to all good lasses;" and we have more than once known "Jenny Jones" employed in a church as a psalm tune. Surely

* We are sorry to find Milton (composed by our great poet) excluded from both these collections. Why it is so from the St. John's we cannot divine; and if it be banished from the Oakington, because, "though admirable in itself, it is not likely to be generally acceptable," we know not why Burford was retained. We think that were the " Ave Reginæ Cælorum "harmonized to suit the measure, eights and sevens, a great obligation would be conferred on English psalmody.

some efficient steps should be taken against the occurrence of such disorders as are these.

We hope that the above remarks may possess some degree of utility, for those who are anxiously endeavouring to bring about so desirable a result as the banishment of these and similar irregularities. The complete eradication of the present evils attendant on our system of psalmody, cannot be looked for till it becomes matter of consideration to those in authority. But much may be done by individual clergymen, each in the service of the church over which he is set, so to arrange and direct the public worship of God, that, to a far greater extent than is now the case, we may "with one mind and one mouth glorify

Him."

ART. IX.-Tracts for the Times, No. 90.-Remarks on certain Passages in the Thirty-nine Articles. London: Rivingtons. 1841.

2. A Letter addressed to the Rev. R. W. Jelf, D.D., Canon of Christ Church, in explanation of No. 90, in the Series called "The Tracts for the Times." By the AUTHOR. Oxford:

Parker. 1841.

3. A Letter to the Rev. E. B. Pusey, D.D., Regius Professor of Hebrew, and Canon of Christ Church, on the publication of No. 90, of the "Tracts for the Times." By WILLIAM SEWELL, M.A., Professor of Moral Philosophy in the University of Oxford. Oxford: Parker. 1841.

IT may, perhaps, be expected that we should assign some reason for again entering into a controversy which for more than a year past we have tacitly declined; and we think that the turn which affairs have taken at Oxford, in reference to the "Tracts for the Times," of so much consequence, and likely to lead to results so important, as not merely to justify but to demand the renunciation of our purpose.

But inasmuch as we have ourselves been honoured by Lord Morpeth with long quotations in the House of Commons (his Lordship seeking, under shelter of our authority, to prop up a cause which we abhor), and inasmuch as those quotations have been either re-echoed or commented upon by the most distinguished portions of the newspaper press, it may be necessary, before again touching on the Tracts, to say a few words as to the part taken by this Review in the controversy.

A change took place in the management previous to April, 1840, since which period-and not since January, 1840, as has been sometimes supposed-the Review has been in the hands