either of these descriptions is exaggerated when we remember
the time at which they were written (1838). Very few chapels
in London had organs, or indeed instruments of any kind, and
there is no doubt that the congregations, as a rule, _did_
sing at the tops of their voices, a proceeding known under
the more euphonious title of 'hearty congregational singing.'

He gives a far more favourable account of the music in the
village church. In the essay just referred to he mentions
the fact that he attended a service in a West of England
church where the service 'was spoken--not merely read--by a
grey-headed minister.'

The psalms were accompanied by a few instrumental
performers, who were stationed in a small gallery
extending across the church at the lower end; and the
voices were led by the clerk, who, it was evident,
derived no slight pride and gratification from this
portion of the service.

But if the church music in England was not of a very high
quality when Dickens wrote the above, it was, according to his
own account, far superior to what he heard in certain churches
in Italy. When in Rome he visited St. Peter's, where he was
quite unimpressed by the music.

I have been infinitely more affected in many English
cathedrals when the organ has been playing, and in
many English country churches when the congregation
have been singing.