[Footnote 81: Another interesting and rather bold point of view in reference to the significance of Chabrier's undertakings is to the effect that "Chabrier was an inspired experimenter, but would never have become a master; nevertheless, his experiments are more valuable to art than the mastery of Saint-Saëns."] [Footnote 82: See footnotes on pages 137 and 161 in reference to the masterly orchestration of Debussy and of Elgar.] In order to discover to what extent Saint-Saëns has been aided by his immediate compatriots, one must turn to the sound methods and sterling achievements of AMBROSE THOMAS (1811-1896). A worthy exponent of lyric opera, Thomas possessed like Gounod a high degree of musical intelligence. His music contains the essence of polish and refinement, but its very elegance is at times detrimental to emphatic utterance, to dramatic strength, to intensity of passion. Certain Italian formulae are in evidence. German influence is also apparent. Neither of these characteristics, however, predominates over Thomas' personal individuality and French methods of artistic development. "Mignon" is veiled in a filmy haze of poesy, owing to the delicacy of its orchestration. "Hamlet," which is in reality a grand lyric tragedy, represents an extreme phase of French grand opera. Wagnerian principles are here frankly espoused, whereas the solidity and vigor of the orchestration display an advance upon the scoring of "Mignon" and "Françoise de Rimini." Thomas never overloaded his scores. The orchestration is clear in _ensemble_, ingenious in detail, always interesting, appropriate, varied. Characteristic tone-color and poetically conceived combinations reveal the skilful hand of a competent master.