I am not interested in authenticity, just in what Hugill thought, etc!

We have on one hand Hugill's "official" and probably most guarded statement of opinion in SfSS, where he recommends Lloyd's albums.

Then we have Lighter's data, which is a bit more balanced. The recommendation would still seem to hold, though he has specific criticisms.

I am curious as to what it says in Arthur's book -- especially whether it presents Hugill as significantly more negative. I also am curious what the source of that data would be.

Then we have my suggestion, which is that while Hugill may have criticized some things in Lloyd, there are other things that, if a true pedant, he would also have criticized. Hugill was able to criticize the delivery of Lloyd in some respects while still accepting some of Lloyd's material as authentic -- that is, of evidence of something that was "out there" in tradition.