family, by Gebethner and Wolff, of Warsaw.  But the most important editions—­ namely, critical editions—­are Tellefsen’s (I mention them in chronological order), Klindworth’s, Scholtz’s, and Breitkopf and Hartel’s.  Simon Richault, of Paris, the publisher of the first-named edition, which appeared in 1860, says in the preface to it that Tellefsen had in his possession a collection of the works of Chopin corrected by the composer’s own hand.  As to the violoncello part of the Polonaise, it was printed as Franchomme always played it with the composer.  The edition was also to be free from all marks of expression that were not Chopin’s own.  Notwithstanding all this, Tellefsen’s edition left much to be desired.

My friend and fellow-pupil, Thomas Tellefsen [writes Mikuli], who, till Chopin’s last breath, had the happiness to be in uninterrupted intercourse with him, was quite in a position to bring out correctly his master’s works in the complete edition undertaken by him for Richault.  Unfortunately, a serious illness and his death interrupted this labour, so that numerous misprints remained uncorrected.

[Footnote:  Mikuli’s spelling of the name is Telefsen, whereas it is Tellefsen on the Norwegian’s edition of Chopin’s works, in all the dictionaries that mention him, and in the contemporary newspaper notices and advertisements I have come across.]

[Footnote:  I do not know how to reconcile this last remark with the publisher’s statement that the edition appeared in 1860 (it was entered at Stationers’ Hall on September 20, 1860), and Tellefsen’s death at Paris in October, 1874.]

Klindworth’s edition, the first volume of which appeared in October, 1873, and the last in March, 1876, at Moscow (P.  Jurgenson), in six volumes, is described on the title-page as “Complete works of Fr. Chopin critically revised after the original French, German, and Polish editions, carefully corrected and minutely fingered for pupils.” [Footnote:  This edition has been reprinted by Augener & Co., of London.] The work done by Klindworth is one of the greatest merit, and has received the highest commendations of such men as Liszt and Hans von Bulow.  Objections that can be made to it are, that the fingering, although excellent, is not always Chopinesque; and that the alteration of the rhythmically-indefinite small notes of the original into rhythmically-definite ones, although facilitating the execution for learners, counteracts the composer’s intention.  Mikuli holds that an appeal to Chopin’s manuscripts is of no use as they are full of slips of the pen—­wrong notes and values, wrong accidentals and clefs, wrong slurs and 8va markings, and omissions of dots and chord-intervals.  The original French, German, and English editions he regards likewise as unreliable.  But of them he gives the preference to the French editions, as the composer oftener saw proofs of them.  On