beauty; and in Germany itself it would be difficult to find anyone who would give a more delicate interpretation of some of Haendel’s and Mozart’s symphonic works.  His orchestra has kept, moreover, the superiority that it had already acquired in its repertory of Wagner’s works.  But M. Chevillard has communicated a warmth and energy of rhythm to it that it did not possess before.  His interpretations of Beethoven, even if they are somewhat superficial, are very full of life.  Like Lamoureux, he has hardly caught the spirit of French romantic works—­of Berlioz, and still less of Franck and his school; and he seems to have but lukewarm sympathy for the more recent developments of French music.  But he understands well the German romantic composers, especially Schumann, for whom he has a marked liking; and he tried, though without great success, to introduce Liszt and Brahms into France, and was the first among us to attract real attention to Russian music, whose brilliant and delicate colouring he excels in rendering.  And, like M. Colonne, he has brought the great German Kapellmeister among us—­Weingartner, Nikisch, and Richard Strauss, the last mentioned having directed the first performance in Paris of his symphonic poems, Zarathustra, Don Quixote, and Heldenleben, at the Lamoureux concerts.

Nothing could have better completed the musical education of the public than this continuous defile, for the past ten years, of Kapellmeister and foreign virtuosi, and the comparisons that their different styles and interpretations afforded.  Nothing has better helped forward the improvement of Parisian orchestras than the emulation brought about by the meetings between Parisian conductors and those of other countries.  At present our own conductors are worthy rivals of the best in Germany.  The string instruments are good; the wood has kept its old French superiority; and though the brass is still the weakest part of our orchestras, it has made great progress.  One may still criticise the grouping of orchestras at concerts, for it is often defective; there is a disproportion between the different families of instruments and, in consequence, between their different sonorities, some of which are too thin and others too dull.  But these defects are fairly common all over Europe to-day.  Unhappily, more peculiar to France is the insufficiency or poor quality of the choirs, whose progress has been far from keeping pace with that of the orchestras.  It is to this side of music that the directors of concerts must now bring their efforts to bear.

The Lamoureux Concerts have not had as stable a dwelling-place as the Chatelet Concerts.  They have wandered about Paris from one room to another—­from the Cirque d’Hiver to the Cirque d’Ete, and from the Chateau-d’Eau to the Nouveau Theatre.  At the present moment they are in the Salle Gaveau, which is much too small for them.  In spite of the progress of music and musical taste, Paris has