Besides, for the purpose of singing in his own tongue, an Anglo-Saxon does not and should not want to acquire any other mode, as he is by nature in possession of one of the _best_ modes of expression. There is none intrinsically purer, none possessed of more vigor or power of expression. There are those with greater softness combined with purity, but lacking strength, as the Italian; and those with more soulfulness combined with strength, but lacking purity, as the German. This native element of purity allied to strength in the Anglo-Saxon, more especially in the English-American, mode of expression is primarily the cause of the high position in the artistic world of the American singer. I ascribe the superiority of the "American" mode of expression over the "English," when untrammelled as in song, in part to the greater personal liberty, the greater want of conventionality, the vast extent of our territory, and our almost constantly clear and unclouded sky; all these being conditions that assist the free exercise of one's natural endowments. To reach the best results in the art of singing, the body as well as the soul must be, as far as possible, untrammelled in any direction. While the idiomatic expression of the English language here and abroad is the same, the social restraint and the conservatism of the English as a nation act against the best outcome of their gift of song, which demands for its best expression freedom from conventionality or any other constraint. Each nation is at its best in its own tongue. Our orators are equal to any there are in the world. They do not speak according to the Italian, the German, or any other school. If they did, they would utterly fail and make themselves ridiculous. Why do people, then, want to "speak" in this more expansive and soulful manner, called "singing," in these foreign modes? I know the answer will be that singing and speaking are things quite apart, having no affinity in their mode of production. I shall show, as I have already partly shown, that they are of precisely the _same order_, though different phases of that order; that they cannot be separated; in so far as the elements which belong to speech also belong to song, and those which belong to song also belong to speech; but that they are used in an inverse order in the former as well as in the latter.