Shortly after taking up his abode permanently in London, for the purpose of pursuing his studies for the Bar, he met with a heavy blow in the death of his brother Frederick, who had entered on a career at Cambridge which promised great success. The letters in the volume addressed to the latter show how high was the estimate W. H. Maule had formed of his brother, and how deep was the interest he took in him. In 1814 W. H. Maule was called to the Bar and joined the Oxford Circuit. Some interesting and amusing letters written by him to his sister during his first sessions and circuit are given. At the Usk Sessions he had two briefs, for which he received three guineas (his first fees); "there was nothing to do in one, and very little in the other." The only barristers mentioned by name were Campbell, with whom he travelled by the mail to Usk, and afterwards in a post-chaise between Monmouth and Gloucester, and Horace Twiss, whom he describes as "not an unentertaining man."

Before a year had elapsed after the loss of Frederick, he sustained another great affliction in the death of his mother. She had always exercised a powerful influence over him, governing, as Miss Leathley says, "with a hand at once so firm and gentle that her power was felt only by the attractions that drew him to her. He always," it is added, "retained a strong feeling of a mother's influence. In after life he appeared to think no motive for exertion could be greater than the knowledge of her wishes, and when they had been urged in vain, seemed at a loss to suggest any other, and regarded the case as hopeless."

With the death of his mother the volume closes.

were henceforth," as Miss Leathley says, "no great joys and sorrows, no wonderful triumphs and successes, or what perhaps may be yet more interesting, no great struggles and anxieties."

His advancement in his profession was a gradual and lengthened process, and his elevation to the Bench was only in the natural course of things. The qualities which he displayed as a counsel and a judge were precisely those which had marked his early life. His character as a lawyer was adequately estimated in the article to which we have already referred; and we need now only add that he was in no respects inferior to any of the eminent judges who had attained the same University honours as himself. In none of those cases is it possible to discover that much advantage arose from mathematical training, while with respect to Sir W. H. Maule it may be truly said that the essential elements of all those qualities of mind which he displayed so conspicuously at the Bar and on the Bench existed quite independently of his mathematical studies, and would have been equally striking if he had confined himself entirely to classical and philosophical

reading during his University career. We do not say that they would have been more so, because a man of such marked individuality must under any training have come out very much such as we knew him in Banco, at Nisi Prius, and in the Crown Court.

AS

VII.-NOTES ON THE TEMPLE CHURCH.

PART II.

S the establishment of the choral service in the Temple Church, now so well-known, was one of the earliest instances of an exceptional step being taken, which has since happily become the custom, a few additional words respecting its institution and development may not be without interest.

Previous to the restoration of the church, as we have seen, a quartet of vocalists used to sing the hymns from the organ gallery, closing the curtains between times. An improved feeling as to fitness forbad a continuance of this arrangement. On the completion of the restoration of the church a regular choir was provided, and properly divided into decani and cantores, on the two sides of the church immediately below and opposite the organ. The church was re-opened for Divine service on November 20, 1842, Mr. Turle, of Westminster Abbey, presiding at the organ; the present organist, Mr. Hopkins, giving his first competitive performance, May 7, 1843, and being appointed organist in the October following. The choral service, as originally introduced, consisted of English and Gregorian chants; the Ferial Responses for ordinary use, with Tallis's Responses on the Church Festivals; various settings of the Canticles, technically called services; and a selection of some of the best and most appropriate anthems. In the first instance, a few misplacements occurred, which were afterwards rectified. Thus, the anthem in the morning service was sung immediately before the sermon; but, in 1855, it was proposed and arranged in choir committee, "That henceforth the anthem in the morning service be sung at the period of the service mentioned in the rubric, and that a psalm or hymn, or a part, be sung between the service and the sermon." The opportunity thus offered of joining in a metrical hymn was so generally appreciated by the congregation, that a second hymn was directed to be sung between the prayers and the communion service in place of the sanctus, which correctly belonged to another period of the service. A hymn was also introduced into the afternoon service, after the prayers and before the sermon.

And here let us note that the effect of this change, and still more of the introduction of the new hymn-book and its general distribution throughout the church, has been very greatly to improve the congregational singing. We question very much if there is any place of worship in Londoncertainly there is none with which we are acquainted—where this is so good. Everybody has the music and words at hand. The organ and the choir lead well. The congregation is probably the most highly educated one which is to be found throughout England, and the result is often a volume of harmony that is rarely to be met with.

The organ had been placed so far back in the organchamber, that the organist sonetimes experienced great difficulty in hearing the singers, and the singers the organ. This difficulty was, therefore, taken into consideration by the choir committee in 1866, and ultimately the instrument was moved forward about six feet, and the handsomely carved oak case, which had previously been almost out of sight, was placed immediately in front of the arches and columns. There was the less objection to this arrangement, as the marble shafts, now partially hidden, were of no greater age than the time of the restoration of the church thirty years ago, and, therefore, possessed neither historical nor archæological interest.

We have spoken of the Temple organ as it existed before the restoration of the church. This organ has a curious history of its own, which must not be passed over. Many members of the Middle Temple also have a pecuniary interest in the instrument, inasmuch as they have paid on their call 27. for organ and lucidaries." We do not know what a lucidary is, but no doubt the payment which had to be made on behalf thereof was the correct thing, like all the other payments. In "A Few Notes on the Temple Organ," the ancient history this instrument is detailed, with curious and fresh matter collected by the writer. "Father Smith," as he is called in England, was the builder. His name was in truth Bernhardt Schmidt; and he came over to England from Germany with his nephews, Gerard and Bernhardt (or Christian), in the reign of King Charles II. The organ in Whitehall Chapel was his first undertaking in England. Pepys, in July, 1660, entered in his Diary the following notes:

"Sth (Lord's Day).-To Whitehall Chapel, where I got in with ease by going before the Lord Chancellor with Mr. Kipps. Here I heard very good musique, the first time that ever I remember to have heard the organs, and singing men in surplices, in my life."

*

*Pepys is right in using the plural; for what is commonly called "an organ," generally consists of a combination of a great organ, a choir organ, a swell organ, and pedal organ.

Schmidt soon gained great fame and much employment. Westminster Abbey, St. Margaret's, and many other churches, were enriched with organs from his hand. One stop of Smith's has often sufficed to give a reputation to an instrument. The beauty and sweetness of his tone has been always unrivalled. But Father Smith had his mechanical defects; and the action, packing, and general arrangement was bad even for his own day, and now would not be tolerated. Even his pipes were, externally, ill-finished. When he was remonstrated with in respect of the latter incompleteness, he is reported to have replied, "I do not care if ze pipe looks like von teufel; I shall make him schpeak like von engel." Smith's great rivals were Harris, and his son Renatus Harris; and this led to the "battle of the organs" at the Temple, of which the following is the amusing account now presented

"About the end of the reign of King Charles II., the Societies of the Temple being determined to have erected in their church an organ as complete as possible, had been in treaty with Smith for that purpose, when Harris was introduced to their notice; and both of these eminent artists were backed by the recommendation of such an equal number of powerful friends and celebrated organists, that the Benchers were unable to determine among themselves which to employ They, therefore (as appears by an order in the books of the Temple, dated February, 1682), proposed, that if each of these excellent artists would set up an organ in one of the halls belonging to either of the Societies, they would have erected in their church that which, in the greatest number of excellences, deserved the preference.' Smith and Harris agreeing to this proposal, a committee, composed of Masters of the Bench of both Societies, was appointed in May, 1683, to decide upon the instrument to be retained for the use of the Temple Church; and, in about a year or fourteen months after, each competitor, with the utmost exertion of his abilities, had an instrument ready for trial. When Harris had completed his instrument, he presented a petition to the Benchers of the Inner Temple, stating that his organ was ready for trial, and praying that he might be permitted to set it up in the church on the south side of the communion table. An order was accordingly made by the Benchers, granting the permission he sought. This petition of Harris is dated 26th May, 1684; and thereby the date of the completion of his instrument is established. It is almost certain that Smith's organ was ready previous to the above date, and that for some reason (possibly to avoid the necessity of re-voicing if he

"A Few Notes on the Temple Organ," p. 8.

should be the successful competitor) he had obtained leave to place it in the church, which suggested to Harris the propriety of adopting the same expedient.

"Dr. Tudway, who was living at that period, and was intimately acquainted with both the organ-makers, says that Dr. Blow and Mr. Purcell, then in their prime, performed on Father Smith's organ on appointed days, and displayed its excellence; and, until the other was heard, every one believed that this must be chosen.

"Harris employed M. Draghi, organist to Queen Catherine, a very eminent master, to touch his organ, which brought it into favour; and such was the excellence of the instruments, that to decide which deserved the preference puzzled the committee appointed for that purpose, who did not come to any determination, or make any report upon the subject; and in consequence the battle of the organs' was commenced, and the two rival organ-builders continued thus vieing with each other for near a twelvemonth. At length, Harris challenged Father Smith to make additional reed-stops within a given time; these were the Vox humana, Cremorne, the double Courtel, or double Bassoon, and some others. The stops, which were newly invented, or at least new to English ears, gave great delight to the crowds who attended the trials; and the imitations were so exact and pleasing on both sides, that it was difficult to determine who had best succeeded.

"The contention now became tedious and disagreeable, at least to the Benchers of the Middle Temple, who first made choice of Smith's organ, as appears by the following interesting extract from the books of that Society :-

"June 2, 1685.-The Masters of the Bench at this Parliament, taking into their consideration the tedious competicion betweene the two organ-makers, about their fitting an organ to the Temple Church, and having in severall termes, and at severall times, compared both the organs now standing in the said church, as they have played severall Sundays one after the other, and as they have lately played the same Sunday together alternately at the same service. Now, at the suite of severall masters of the barr, and students of this society, pressing to have a speedy determination of the said controversie; and in justice to the said workemen, as well as for the freeing themselves from any complaints concerning the same, doe unanimously in full parliamt resolve and declare the organ in the said church, made by Bernard Smith, to bee, in their judgments, both for sweetnes and fulness of sound (besides ye extraordinary stopps, quarter notes, and other rarityes therein), beyond comparison preferrable before the other of the said organs made by Harris, and that the same is more ornamentall and substantiall, and both for