and is certainly wide of the truth. Nevertheless there is ample evidence that the varnish used by Thomas Dodd was very excellent, and had a rich appearance rarely to be met with in instruments of the English school. Dodd was encouraged in the art of varnish-making by persons of taste, who readily admitted the superior qualities of his composition, and paid him a handsome price for his instruments. He was thus enabled to gratify his taste in his productions by sparing no means to improve them. He ultimately attained such a reputation for his instruments as to command no less a sum than £40 or £50 for a Violoncello. Commanding such prices, it is evident that he spared no expense, or, what was to him a matter of still greater importance, no time. He was most particular in receiving the instruments in that incomplete stage known in the trade as "in the white," i.e., without varnish. He would then carefully varnish them with his own hands, guarding most warily the treasured secret of the composition of his varnish. That he never departed from this practice may be inferred from the fact that the varnish made by the workmen in his employ, apart from the establishment, for their own instruments, is of an entirely different stamp, and evidently shows that they were not in their master's secrets.

The instruments bearing the Dodd label are not valued to the extent of their deserts, and there can be but little doubt that in the course of time they will be valued according to their true merits. They were made by men of exceptional talent, who were neither restricted in price nor material. Under such favourable conditions the results could not fail to be good.

DODD, Thomas, London. Son of Thomas Dodd, musical instrument dealer, of St. Martin's Lane. The father, although not a maker of Violins, possessed excellent judgment, both as regards work and makers, which enabled his son to profit considerably during his early years whilst working with Fendt and Lott.

DORANT, William, London, 1814.
Richd. Duke,
Londoni fecit 17—

Richard Duke, Maker,
Holborn, London. Ann. 17—

DUKE, Richard, worked from 1750-80. The name of this maker has long been a household word with English Violinists both amateur and professional. Who has not got a friend who is the fortunate owner of a veritable "Duke"? The fame of His Majesty Antonio Stradivari himself is not greater than that of Richard Duke in the eyes of many a Fiddle fancier. From his earliest fiddling days the name of Duke became familiar to him; he has heard more of him than of Stradivari, whom he somehow confuses with Cremona. He fondly imagines that Cremona was a celebrated maker, and Stradivari something else; inquires, and becomes more confused, and returns again to "Duke," with whom he is thoroughly at home.

Many excellent judges have wondered how it came to pass that Richard Duke should have been so highly valued, there being, in their estimation, so little amongst his remains worthy of the reputation he gained. The truth is that no maker, with the exception of the great Cremonese artists, has been so persistently counterfeited. The name of Duke has been stamped upon every wretched nondescript, until judges who had not the opportunity of seeing the genuine article mistook the copies for the original, and hence the confusion. When, however, a really fine specimen of Duke is once seen, it is not likely to be forgotten. As copies of Amati such instruments are scarcely surpassed, varnish, work, and material being of the best description. The copies of Stainer were not so successful.

DUKE, Richard, London. Son of the above.

DUNCAN, ——, Aberdeen, 1762.

DUNCAN, George, Glasgow, contemporary.

EGLINGTON, ——, London, 1800.

EVANS, Richard, London, 1750. His label is a curiosity—
Maid in the Paris of
Lanirhengel, by Richard