THE CATHEDRAL ORGAN.

Press, Volume LX, Issue 18220, 3 November 1924, Page 11

THE CATHEDRAL ORGAN.

TO TffE EDITO3 Of "THE FEEE3." Sir, —Synod has given its decision, and that, I suppose, is the end of the matter. Still, the letter of your correspondent, ''Churchman/' seems to show that there are Church people who wonder whether it is really justifiable to spend £OOOO on the "renovating and enlarging'' of the Cathedral orfran. The Dean has pointed out lliat the money held by the Dean and Chapter Estate cannot be used tor any other purposes than those indicated by the men who established the trust; but vro are surely not meant- to draw the conclusion that the enlarging of t.he Cathedral organ is the only or the best purpose to which this money can be devoted. It vias clear to every member of Synod that something had to be done, j Before long the organ would be out: of • action altogether. Synod was told I that, the orjran could be put. in good ! "going order'' for about £3000; this, | however, was regarded as more "patchwork"; it was "folly" to take this .-curse when a virtually new organ could be obtained for £9OOO. Now, in order to be able to vote intelligently o;i the motion, one' should have assured oneself that, these statements about "patchwork' 'and "foliy" were not merely the exaggerated expressions of those who were anxious to see the motion passed. For myself, as one that has some knowledge of the. mechanism of organs, I am convinced that it would liave bccu neither patchwork nor l'olly to spend some £3OOO rather than £9OOO, aud my reasons are these: — (a) The present organ has done excellent service for forty years; it seems to be quite large enough for the requirements of the Cathedral, and to possess a very fair range of stops. Why should we have a bigger one 1 Of' arguments in support I heard nothing, though there were numerous appeals to sentiment: "We must' have an instrument that would-be in keeping with the ideals of the early settlers, whose forethought has enabled us to build such a noble cathedral," etc., etc. Such appeals argue a weak cause, but often achieve their object. Feeling this, I asked for information about the proposed additions (a request. that, went right- to the heart of the matter), but could get no satisfaction. The subject was said to'be too technical; one would need a. copy of the specifications, etc. Thero is a certain amount of truth in these statements, but it was surely possible fo say, without bewildering the uninitiated, that (e.g.) whereas the present pedal organ contains st-ops, the proposed organ will have so many more. Iu fact, I heard quite casually that the new organ is -to have some large bas.s stops (whether they are to be of 32ft or 64-ft tone I don't know), which will account for a lnrge part of t.lie expenditure for additions. Now, lam quite well awa.re that the bass stops are the "foundation stops," and that on these for the most part depend tho number and quality of the others; but. this fact is no argument for building a £.9000 organ in our Cathedral. Olic can imagine the joy such an organ would be to the performer; but that is another question. (b) If the present orgau is quito large enough, all that needs t.o be done is to removo the defective pipes, put fresh ones in their places, and see that a thoroughly reliable action is installed. Tho organ would then be as good as new, for the majority of the pipes, I believe, are in excellent condition, and will be incorporated in the proposed organ. I have always understood that it was the "action" of the Cathedral organ that was the chief trouble. If, then, tho action is sound, and tho pipes arc sound, what more should be wanted? The .fact, seems tto bo that the present- unsatisfactory state o&t.hc organ.has been made the pretext for urging |.he construction of a practically new organ, with the result that tho issues havo been rather confused in the minds of members of Synod. They have taken on trust,, tho statement.that £3OOO worth of renovation would not be' worth the while, whereas it is a question that demands investigation. It is a pity that' about much that we ought to ha.vo known wc wero kept in the dark. The financial aspect of the proposal was, indeed, explained, but nothing was said about tho proposed additions or the need for themI have never heard whether the Chapter approached any New Zealand organ builders with a, view to the renovation of the organ. I believe there are some quite capable of carrying through such a work and giving the utmost satisfaction. The action of the organ iu St. Faul's Presbyterian. Church was replaced by the tubular-pneumatic not long ago by a Christchurch builder. As it is, great' expense (some £.1000) has to bo .incurred in seinding the pipes to London, in having tho whole organ sent out to New Zealand, and in paying duty. One docs indeed wonder whether members of Synod were not asked to decide the question with too great precipitation. While I yield to no one in admiration of the "organ as the "king of instruments,'' aud could wish to see our most, capable organist once more delighting us, as he used to do on the city organ (now no more), yet I cannot feel that the Cathedral should provide such au expensive organ, when the present, one, with the necessary changes, would amply fulfil all requirements.—Yours, etc., - . H. D. .BROADHEAD. Lower Biccarton, November Ist.