Saint-Saens was director with Bussine until 1886.  But from 1881 the influence of Franck and his disciples became more and more felt; and Saint-Saens began to lose interest in the efforts of the new school.  In 1886 there was a division of opinion about a proposition of Vincent d’Indy’s to introduce the works of classical masters and foreign composers into the programmes.  This proposition was adopted; but Saint-Saens and Bussine sent in their resignations.  Franck then became the true president, although he refused the title; and after his death, in 1890, Vincent d’Indy took his place.  Under these two directors a quite important place was given to old and classical music by composers such as Palestrina, Vittoria, Josquin, Bach, Haendel, Rameau, Gluck, Beethoven, Schumann, Liszt, and Brahms.  Foreign contemporary music only occupied a very limited place.  Wagner’s name only appears once, in a transcription of the Venusberg for the pianoforte; and Richard Strauss’s name figures only against his Quartette.  Grieg had his hour of popularity there about 1887, as well as the Russians—­Moussorgski, Borodine, Rimsky-Korsakow, Liadow, and Glazounow—­whom M. Debussy has perhaps helped to make known to us.  At the present moment the Society seems more exclusively French than ever; and the influence of M. Vincent d’Indy and the school of Franck is predominant.  That is only natural; the Societe Nationale most truly earned its title to glory by discerning Cesar Franck’s genius; for the Society was a little sanctuary where the great artist was honoured at a time when he was ignored or laughed at by the rest of the world.  This character of a sanctuary was kept even after victory.  In its general programme of 1903-1904, the Society reminded us with pride that it had remained faithful to the promises made in 1871; and it added that if, in order to permit its members to keep abreast of the general progress of art, it had little by little allowed classical masterpieces and modern foreign works of interest on its programmes, it had, however, always kept its guest-chamber open, and shaped many a future reputation there.

Nothing is truer.  The Societe Nationale is indeed a guest-chamber, where for the past thirty years a guest-chamber art and guest-chamber opinions have been formed; and from it some of the profoundest and most poetic French music has been derived, such as Franck’s and Debussy’s chamber-music.  But its atmosphere is becoming daily more rarefied.  That is a danger.  It is to be feared that this art and thought may be absorbed by the decadent subtleties or pedantic scholasticism which is apt to accompany all coteries—­in short, that its music will be salon-music rather than chamber-music.  Even the Society itself seems to have felt this at times; and at different periods has sought contact with the general public, and put itself into direct communication with it.  “It becomes more and more necessary,” wrote M. Saint-Saens, “that French composers