Joel Horspool, the son of Charles Horspool and Ann Alvey was born in 1855 in Southwell, Nottinghamshire. Aged 16 in the 1871 census he is apprenticed to a draper in Kingston-upon-Hull with his brother Amos Horspool but according to information he gives later they both left and became professional singers with the D'Oyley Carte Company in London. Records show that Amos was certainly a chorister with the D'Oyley Carte Company in 1885. Joel then states that he lost his voice whilst at Lincoln Cathedral and after this he formed the Horspool Natural Voice Academy which claimed to be able to give people a perfect singing or speaking voice. In 1908 he brought an action of libel against Dr Cummings, principal of the Guildhall School of Music. The case drew international interest.
The Poverty Bay Herald, New Zealand, 11th April 1908
THE VOICE PRODUCTION CASE.
The libel action brought by Mr Joel Horspool, otherwise Leonard Kane, and the "Horspool Natural Voice Academy Limited,'' against Dr William Cummings, principal of the Guildhall School of Music, resulted in a verdict for the defendant. The Horspool system was advertised, in the London Daily Telegraph as follows :
VOCAL DISCOVERY OF THE CENTURY.
Horspool's Natural Voice Academy Limited, 14 George street, Hanover Square. Managing director, Professor Horspool. Guarantees all not vocally malformed, irrespective of age, a perfect singing and speaking voice, of full compass and without a break; of full power and perfect pronunciation; without any, body or breath effort, without vocal fatigue or hoarseness; of invaluable benefit to the clergy. Ms.P., and orators. A positive cure for stammering: This system can be acquired by correspondence.
It was this advertisement that Dr Cummings commented upon at a conference of musicians at Buxton. Counsel for the defence, in the course of an address to the jury, said: "The discovery, if it was a discovery, was momentous, revolutionary in the musical profession. It alleged dishonesty in the music teacher who had become aware of it and went on with the old methods he had learned and practised, and it claimed for itself universal results, a universal success, and it was on that footing, and it could only be on that footing that the plaintiff justified an advertisement such as he had issued. As he truly said about the old professors of voice production and song, they could not honestly say they would guarantee to all a perfect singing voice. No man could have said it." Plaintiff's counsel stated that the company did extremely well for eight months. The evidence of Sir Charles Santley and other vocal experts, and the testimony of medical men, was invoked by Dr Cummings. His paper, (says the Musical News) was on the important subject of voice training, historical, pedagogic, and personal; it touched incidentally on the ridiculous pretences of quacks:— When I read of a medicine which is warranted by some quasi-doctor man "to cure every ill, I regard the whole, matter as impudent quackery, and I may say the like of, many of the advertisements of the present day which unblushingly declare that Mr So-and-So "Guarantees a perfect natural voice for singing and speaking. Invaluable to clergy, actors, singer's, orators. No failures. Easily acquired. Voice under perfect control. Hoarseness, fatigue unknown." Here is another: —"A perfect singing and speaking voice; of full compass, and without a break; of full power and perfect pronunciation; without any body or breath effort; without vocal fatigue, or hoarseness. Of invaluable benefit to the clergy,: M's.P., and orators. A positive cure for stammering. Classes at reduced fees. This system can be acquired by correspondence."
... And there were dupes who regarded these impostures as facts! The latter quotation contained the alleged libel.
Further accounts of the court case appeared in other newspapers.
The Musical Times March 1st 1908
The action for slander and libel brought by Mr. Joel Horspool and the Horspool Natural Voice Academy (Limited) against Dr. William H. Cummings, President of the Incorporated Society of Musicians and Principal of the Guildhall School of Music, was tried before Mr. Justice Darling and a special jury on February 6, 7, 10, 13 and 14 at the Royal Courts of Justice. The subject-matter of the slander consisted of words admittedly uttered by Dr. Cummings at the annual conference of the Incorporated Society of Musicians, held at Buxton on January 1, 1907, the plaintiff alleging that these words imputed that he, the plaintiff, was an 'impudent quack,' and that he 'duped and imposed upon the public, and carried on a fraudulent and dishonest business. There was also a further charge that Dr. Cummings had libelled the plaintiff by causing his remarks to be printed in certain newspapers and elsewhere. Dr. Cummings's remarks were based upon an advertisement of Mr. Horspool, and the defence was that they were in the nature of fair comment. The jury, after deliberating for five minutes, returned a verdict for the defendant, for whom judgment was entered, with costs. A similar action brought against The Daily Telegraph newspaper ended in judgment for the defendants, with costs. Among those who gave evidence in favour of Dr. Cummings were Sir Charles Santley and Dr. H. H. Hulbert.
Aberdeen Journal - Friday 7th February 1908
VOICE PRODUCTION IN COURT. In the King's Bench yesterday, Mr Joel Horspool and the Horspool Natural Voice Academy, Ltd., George Street Hanover Square, brought action for libel against Mr William Hayman Cummings, president of the Guildhall School of Music. The plaintiffs case was that he was the discoverer of a system, of voice production and elocution, and the founder and managing director of the plaintiff company. In January of last year the defendant read a paper before the annual conference of the Incorporated Society of Musicians, and, it was stated, falsely and maliciously spoke of the plaintiff's system impudent quackery. Defendant quoted an advertisement, which stated that the system was acquired without fatigue or hoarseness, that it was of invaluable benefit to the clergy, M.P.s, and orators, invaluable cure for stammering, and could be acquired by correspondence. He commented on this advertisement, and, plaintiff alleged, uttered certain words at the meeting, which he knew was attended by reporters. In consequence of the publication of the words complained of plaintiffs said their receipts had fallen off considerably, and they therefore claimed substantial damages. Defendant said the words complained of were not defamatory, and were, fair and bona-fide comments, matters of public interest. Counsel for the plaintiffs described Horspool as man who had devoted 30 years life to the study of the system which he had perfected and carried out with great success. A Congregational minister having given evidence that he had benefited from plaintiff's system, Mr Joel Horspool was called and gave illustrations in court of his discovery. After the formation of the company the receipts, said, averaged £40 a week down to the end of 1906, but after the publication of libel the receipts dropped, and went down to average of £25 a week. The further hearing was adjourned.
Marlborough Express (New Zealand) 8 April 1908.
INTERESTING MUSICAL LIBEL
William Hayman Cummings, principal of the Guildhall School of Music and president of the Incorporated Society of Musicians, was recently defendant in an action for alleged slander and libel before Mr Justice Darling and a special jury in the King's Bench Division. The plaintiffs' were Mr Horspool - described by his counsel as the discoverer of a system of voice production, and the Horspool Natural Voice Academy Limited formed for the purpose of teaching voice production in accordance with the discoveries of Mr Horspool. The alleged slander was said to have been uttered on January 2, 1907, at a meeting of the Incorporated Society of Musicians at Buxton when the defendant made some observations concerning the advertisements of the plaintiff and his company and their system of voice production. The plaintiff pleaded that the defendant's words imputed that he he was a quack, and pretended to be the possessor of knowledge and skill which he did not possess, and that the plaintiff company imposed upon the public and carried on a fraudulent and dishonest business. The defendant, by his defence, did not admit having spoken or published the words complained of, or caused them to be published in the papers. The defendant further pleaded that the words were incapable of imputing and did not mean what the plaintiffs said they meant. Defendant denied that the words were defamatory, and pleaded that they were fair and bona fide comments on matters of public interest. Mr Hemmerde, in opening the case for the plaintiff stated that Mr Horspool was managing director of the plaintiff company. That the words complained of were libellous counsel had very little doubt, and the main question would be whether they were fair comment on a matter Of public interest. The defendant was well known in the musical profession, and was, said counsel, to some extent connected with a rival academy of singing and teaching. Plaintiff (Mr Joel Horspool), was over fifty years of age. At the age of seventeen years he started as a professional singer, and came to London, joining D'Oyley Carte's company. He was a singer without tuition, and with an admirable bass voice. In an evil moment he was persuaded to take lessons in voice production, with the result that he was so absolutely ruined that, having lost his voice, he had to give up his profession as a singer. Plaintiff, having made certain discoveries, opened an academy in 1902. His teaching there was so successful that some of his former pupils in 1906 formed a company, to which he sold the business for £3500 in cash and shares. Plaintiff was appointed managing director for seven years at a salary of £1000 a year. The company were highly successful, but owing to the attack made upon the plaintiff the takings in respect of fees had fallen by about £600 in one year, and might mean the ruin of the company. The plaintiff, in the witness box, gave some vocal examples to illustrate his meaning, which produced, roars of laughter in court. He explained: "You see, when you are talking loudly — this is an apparent shout — you want resonance." Mr Hemmerde: If you are talking at a big meeting —— Witness: Then you want the jaw. — (Loud laughter). His Lordship : Mr Hemmerde knows where he can get plenty of that.—(Laughter). Mr Hemmerde: I don't know so much about that as you, my-Lord. (Laughter). Witness explained the second half of his discovery by saying he found it by watching the jaws of great singers. He found that the big jaw was a gift of nature, and that he had got one too — (Laughter). Witness here, much to the amusement of the Court, produced a skull with a loose jawbone attached to illustrate the action of the jaw. Mr Hemmerde: I suppose there are many methods of breathing taught?. Witness: Oh, very many. Some men will teach you to breathe around by the small of the back. — (Loud laughter). His Lordship: I have come to the conclusion that if we were taught nothing we should know everything. — (Laughter.) Mr Justice Darling: Do you say that some of the Italian singers who have not had special training do not sing well ? — No, no. I do not say that, but I do say that by my system I can make everyone sing. (His view was that the chest played no real part in the production of the voice, but that it came from the cavity of the jaw. How this was effected the witness illustrated, to the amusement of the Court, by assuming several different characters of voice by altering the position of his lower jaw).
Counsel: Does the position in which you keep your body have anything to do with it ?—Not at all. I could bend double,' and even turn a somersault without affecting mv voice.—(Laughter).
Plaintiff added that in assuming the title of professor he was only following an old custom. It meant nothing, but he had stuck to it. It meant nothing more than that he taught singing. He had only a slight knowledge of the anatomy of the throat and mouth beyond what he had read. He had had instruction in music, but not since he was nine years old. He lost his voice when he left Lincoln Cathedral about thirty years ago.
But it seems that you have plenty of voice now ? — That has come since — during the last five years. My voice is now as perfect as it can be. You can't give me the voice of the Archangel Gabriel, you know.
Mr Duke: I never heard it...— (Laughter).
Witness: My system will not make a Mario of you, but it will enable you to sing to the best of your ability.
Mr Duke: It does not promise me very much when you say that if I follow your system I shall be able to sing as well as I can. — (Laughter) You say you discovered all this from hearing a baby cry? — Yes, that is so.
Mr Duke: "Which particular baby was it? — (Laughter).
Mr Justice Darling: Do you want to know whether this particuar baby developed into a Patti - (Laughter).
Witness was then cross-examined in detail upon the anatomy of the mouth and throat and he ultimately exclaimed: "I don't think I will answer any more questions on medical science. I don't think it at all necessary."
Mr Justice Darling: I notice by the advertisement that it is not only to singers to which it appeals, but also to members of Parliament.
Mr Duke: Members of Parliament are not always models of perfect vocalisation, I think. — (Laughter).
The plaintiff was cross-examined as to the statement in the advertisement that he guaranteed a perfect voice, and said that he only intended to give them a singing voice according to their physical conditions .
Mr Justice Darling: It seems to resolve itself into this: he has two pupils, one a crow and the other a canary. He taught them as much as they could be taught, but the one would continue to sing like a canary and the other like a crow. — (Laughter).
Witness: Voices differ as much as faces. Although faces may be very different, they are still faces; and so it is with voices.
Mr Alf. Reginald Marman, secretary of the plaintiff company, stated that in 1906 the average receipts of the company were about £40 a week. For the first three months of 1907 the receipts averaged £24 a week. In cross-examination by Mr Duke, K.C, the witness admitted that the fees paid by pupils varied, the lowest being £2 12s 6d. They had received as much as 100 guineas from pupils.
Mr Justice Darling: Do you mean you charge some pupils 100 guineas for the same tuition which you give to other people for £2 12s — No.
Was the 100 guineas case a very obstinate one? — No; he had more tuition.
Mr Duke: If this is a system that can be imparted within a month why does one gentleman take lessons for two years?— They are never finished in rendering. You mean so long as they are open
to pay they can go on ? — Certainly. We never refuse money. — (Laughter).
Further cross-examined, witness said there would be a meeting of the plaintiffs' company at the end of the present proceedings. It was of no use having meetings at the present time, as they were insolvent.
Mr Duke: The company were insolvent, at the end of 1906? — Not insolvent.
Mr Cummings, in his evidence, stated that he commenced to sing at St. Paul's Cathedral when he was seven years of age. He was pressed to go to Buxton to speak on voice culture. Witness honestly believed, what he said when he made the remarks complained of. There was no such thing as a perfect singing voice. Power was not the object of the singer. He was quite certain that no system of singing could be taught by correspondence. What would you say about the drawing of the baby's face and protruding the lower jaw? — The only singer who protrudes the lower jaw is the well - known donkey. — (Laughter).
His Lordship: Have you studied why he does it?
Defendant: Because he is an ass. — (Much laughter).
Dr John M. Recce was interposed as a witness. He said a number of plaintiffs' pupils came to see him in 1894. He examined their throats, and out of twenty cases there were three of the pupils who had rupture of the ligaments of the vocal chords after plaintiffs' tuition. He had examined the throats of the pupils previous to undergoing the tuition. Witness had a large practice among professional singers in London. The rupture of the ligaments was due to excessive tension, Great voices were not made they were born with the singer. The voice of the greatest singers of the present time — Madame Patti, Madame Melba, and Madame Tetrazzini — were born with the singer.
Mr Duke: What do you attrbiute the quality of their voices to? — Not only to the condition of the vocal chords, but to the condition of the throat and nasal organs. The more relaxed a throat is the better it is for the singer. Cross-examined by Mr Hemmerde witness said he knew very few singers who protruded the jaw in singing.
Witness: Do you know any?
His Lordship: Dr. Cummings said he knew only one. — (Laughter).
Mr Hemmerde said that Dr. Cummings referred to the donkey as putting down, his jaw in order to make a noise.
His Lordship: Not to make a noise, but to improve his singing -(Laughter).
The jury found for the defendant.
Having lost his libel case seems to have ended his business and Joel HORSPOOL appeared in the list of receiving orders for bankruptcy in The London Gazette of 15 May 1908. He was residing at 25 Doughty Street, Russell Square, London - formerly at 17 Broadhurst Gardens, Hampstead - and had carried on business as Teacher of Singing from George Street, Hanover Square, London.
Aberdeen Journal - Friday 26th June 1908
Sequel to a Libel Action. —At the London Bankruptcy Court yesterday the public examination was concluded of Joel Horspool, teacher of singing. The debtor was plaintiff in action for libel against Dr H. Cummings, of the Guildhall School of Music, who is petitioner for £690. The debtor attributed his failure to the loss of the libel action brought against Dr Cummings in connection with the Horspool Natural Voice Academy.
Joel was married twice, firstly to Laura Dawson in 1880 and then to Jane Mossop in 1900. So far no death has been found for Laura. There appear to have been no children from either marriage.