THE CENTRAL COUNCIL.
COMPLETE LIST OF SOCIETIES REPRESENTED, WITH NUMBER OF MEMBERS SO FAR AS KNOWN, AND NAMES OF REPRESENTATIVES.
|Ancient Society of College Youths||3,848||F. E. Dawe.|
|W. D. Smith.|
|C. F. Winney.|
|W. T. Cockerill.|
|Royal Cumberland Youths||600||G. Newson.|
|S. James’ Society||450||E. E. Richards.|
|W. H. L. Buckingham|
|Bath and Wells Diocesan Association||(?)||Rev. C. W. Griffith.|
|Rev. J. U. Todd.|
|Bedfordshire Association||129||Rev. W. W. C. Baker.|
|Birmingham and District Amal. Soc.||107||J. Carter.|
|Chester Diocesan Guild||470||W. Walmsley.|
|H. A. Heywood.|
|Devonshire Guild||235||Col. Troyte.|
|Rev. W. S. Willett.|
|Durham and Newcastle Diocesan As.||334||R. S. Story.|
|Essex Association||495||Rev. T. L. Papillon.|
|F. G. Newman.|
|N. J. Pitstow.|
|Gloucester and Bristol Diocesan Assn.||454||Rev. F. A. Cockey.|
|E. B. James.|
|G. H. Phillott.|
|Hereford Diocesan Guild||291||J. J. Bratton.|
|J. G. Wall.|
|Herts. County Association||120||E. P. Debenham.|
|Kent County Association||740||Rev. E. W. Carpenter.|
|Rev. F. J. O. Helmore.|
|Lancashire Association||762||Rev. H. J. Elsee.|
|Leeds and District Amal. Society||110||T. Lockwood.|
|Lincolnshire (North) Association||269||F. F. Linley.|
|N. E. Snow.|
|S. Martin’s Guild||109||H. Bastable.|
|Middlesex Association||100||G. B. Lucas.|
|Midland Counties’ Association||516||A. P. Heywood.|
|J. W. Taylor.|
|Norwich Diocesan Association||856||W. L. Catchpole.|
|Rev. J. H. Pilkington.|
|R. H. Brundle.|
|Rev. H. E. Bulwer.|
|Oxford Diocesan Guild||1103||Rev. F. E. Robinson.|
|A. H. Cocks.|
|Rev. G. F. Coleridge.|
|J. W. Washbrook.|
|Salisbury Diocesan Guild||324||Rev. A. D. Hill.|
|Stafford Archdeaconry Society||200||S. Reeves.|
|Surrey Association||241||A. B. Carpenter.|
|E. F. Strange.|
|Sussex Association||520||Rev. C. D. P. Davies.|
|G. F. Attree.|
|A. E. Nye.|
|United Counties’ Association||183||J. Holden.|
|Winchester Diocesan Guild||521||F. W. J. Rees.|
|G. H. Barnett.|
|Worcestershire and District Asso.||200||J. S. Pritchett.|
|R. E. Grove.|
|Yorkshire Association||805||W. Snowdon.|
|W. H. Howard.|
|C. H. Hattersley.|
|B. T. Copley.|
(To retire this year.)
Rev. Dr. Raven, W. Wakley, J. Pettit, Rev. W. Wigram, Rev. Pitt Eykyn, J. C. Mitchell, H. S. Thomas, C. Hounslow and W. T. Pates,
(To retire next year.)
W. H. Thompson, Rev. A. H. Boughey, Capt. Acland.
No. of Societies represented, 30. Total number of Members, 14,963.
No. of Representatives, 72. No. of Hon. Members, 12. Total, 84.
No. of Vacant Seats, 12.
The Bell News and Ringers’ Record, March 24, 1894, page 544
THE CENTRAL COUNCIL.
The fourth annual meeting of the Central Council was held on Easter Tuesday at the “Inns of Court” Hotel, Holborn, London. There was a large muster of representatives, the official list of those signing their names being as follows: Messrs. F. E. Dawe, W. D. Smith, C. F. Winney and W. T. Cockerill, College Youths; Messrs. G. Newson, H. Dains, B. Foskett and A. Jacob, Royal Cumberland Youths; Messrs. E. E. Richards and W. H. L. Buckingham, St. James’ Society; Rev. W. W. C. Baker, Bedfordshire Association; Mr. J. Carter, Birmingham and District Amalgamated Society; Messrs. W. Walmsley and H. A. Heywood, Chester Diocesan Guild; Rev. W. S. Willett, Devonshire Guild; Mr. F. Lees, Durham and Newcastle Diocesan Association; Rev. T. L. Papillon, Messrs. F. G. Newman, N. J. Pitstow, Essex Association; Rev. H. A. Cockey, Messrs. E. B. James and G. H. Phillott, Gloucester and Bristol Diocesan Association; Messrs. J. J. Bratton and J. G. Wall, Hereford Diocesan Guild; Mr. E. P. Debenham, Herts. Association; Revs. E. W. Carpenter and F. J. O. Helmore, Messrs. E. Bedwell and A. Palmer, Kent Association; Rev. H. J. Elsee, Lancashire Association; Mr. T. Lockwood, Leeds and District Amalgamated Society; Mr. N. E. Snow, North Lincolnshire Association; Mr. G. B. Lucas, Middlesex Association; Messrs. A. P. Heywood, J. W. Taylor, J. Griffin and S. Cooper, Midland Counties’ Association; Revs. J. H. Pilkington and H. E. Bulwer, Messrs. W. L. Catchpole and R. H. Brundle, Norwich Diocesan Association; Revs. F. E. Robinson and G. F. Coleridge, and Mr. A. H. Cocks, Oxford Diocesan Guild; Rev. A. D. Hill, Salisbury Diocesan Guild; Mr. S. Reeves, Stafford Archdeaconry Society; Dr. A. B. Carpenter and Mr. E. F. Strange, Surrey Association; Rev. C. D. P. Davies, Messrs. G. F. Attree, J. Parker and A. E. Nye, Sussex Association; Messrs. F. W. J. Rees, G. Williams, G. H. Barnett and H. White, Winchester Diocesan Guild; Mr. R. E. Grove, Worcester and District Association; Messrs. W. Snowdon and C. H. Hattersley, Yorkshire Association; Rev. A. H. Boughey, Messrs. W. H. Thompson, J. C. Mitchell, W. Wakley, J. Pettit and F. E. Ward, Honorary members.
The minutes of last year’s meeting having been read and confirmed, the first items upon the agenda were the election of President and Hon. Secretary for the ensuing three years.
Election of President.
Mr. Dawe said he was very pleased to find that there was only one name nominated for the office of President. He was sure that it did not require any words of his to bring under the notice of the Council the excellent qualities of the gentleman who had occupied the chair for the past three years. He had great pleasure in proposing Mr. Percival Heywood as President for the ensuing three years (applause).
Mr. Hattersley having seconded, the resolution was submitted by Mr. Dawe to the Council, and unanimously carried with applause.
The President, in taking the chair, desired to thank Mr. Dawe for the kind manner in which he had spoken of his services, and the Council for the manner in which his name had been received. He was afraid that it was a rather one-sided election, as only one person had been nominated, but at any rate it avoided the delay of a contest (laughter). He trusted that he should be able to serve them in the future as he had endeavoured to do in the past (hear, hear). It was not his intention to detain them with many words from the chair, as he had always considered it his place to direct the business rather than to take up time by an expression of his individual opinions; there were one or two matters, however, which he must briefly refer to. Soon after the last Council Meeting he received a letter from the Secretary of the North Lincolnshire Association, containing a copy of a resolution passed by that Society in April last, which ran as follows:
“The North Lincolnshire Association of Church Bell ringers desire to congratulate A. Percival Heywood, Esq., on the success which has attended the labours of the Central Council over which he has so ably presided for the past three years, and to assure him of their continued confidence in the decisions of the Council, and in the utility and value of the Council to ringers individually, and to their Associations” (applause). He, the President, thought that if a few more of their friends would publicly express their views of the work of the Council it would be of great assistance to the Council which had indeed laboured hard to forward the interests of the Exercise (hear, hear). It was satisfactory at all events to know that the decisions of the Council had met with approval in some parts of the country. There was a long agenda to be dealt with, and he trusted that those who might speak upon the questions under consideration would be short and keep to the point. It should be borne in mind that the Council was not there to make laws, in fact they had no power to bind anyone. Their object as a Council was to draw together the whole of the ringing Associations throughout the country, inviting them to send their best members to debate the questions that were brought forward. The decisions of the Council must thus of necessity carry weight, for they went forth as the decisions of a body which would be freely admitted to comprise the majority of the ablest ringers in England. These decisions it was hoped would in time be adopted throughout the country, and so in the long run the council would become the ruling body in the Exercise, not by any undue assertion of authority, but by a common admission of their good sense and integrity. There were some Associations that had not elected their full number of delegates; this was to be regretted because it deprived the Council of debating power which might have proved valuable in their discussions. He thought the Council was justified in asking that the Associations would send all the debating power each one was entitled to. In conclusion he thanked them for having listened so patiently to him (applause).
Election of Honorary Secretary.
Mr. Foskett said it gave him pleasure to propose the re-election of the Rev. H. Earle Bulwer as Hon. Sec. The work had been efficiently carried out, and he had no doubt the rev. gentleman would continue to discharge the duties with just the same efficiency in the future as he had in the past.
Mr. Catchpole having seconded,
The President warmly supported the motion, saying he could not speak too highly of Mr. Bulwer’s assistance to him personally.
The resolution having been unanimously adopted with applause,
The Rev. H. Earle Bulwer said he desired to thank the Council for the reception that had been accorded his name. He had done his best to carry out the duties in accordance with his own lights. In doing so he did not assume that he had given satisfaction to everyone. It must be remembered that he had a great many other interests to watch. If the rules of the Council were not observed, if members of the Council and Hon. Secs. of Associations did not assist him, he should not be able to carry on the duties. He would appeal to Hon. Secs. of Associations to send in returns sooner to the Council, and also to forward subscriptions in good time, otherwise it would be almost impossible for him to continue in office. Since the commencement of the present year, he had had out the books of the Council almost every day to do work which might have been done in one day. He would appeal to all to assist him by punctuality in dealing with all matters with which the Secretary of the Council was concerned. So long as he was able to discharge the duties, he should have pleasure in doing so, for he believed in the Council, and that it was bound to do sterling work for the Exercise. He accepted with pleasure the post, and would do his best to discharge the duties for the next three years (applause).
Election of Hon. Members.
The President having read letters regretting their inability to attend from Dr. Raven, Mr. J. S. Pritchett, Rev. T. Griffith, and Mr. R. S. Story, said the attendance of Honorary Members had not been all that could be desired, and he thought that Mr. Wakley was the only Hon. Member that had attended the whole of the Council Meetings.
Mr. Snowdon advocated that the distinction of Hon. Member should be conferred upon those who had done something for the Exercise, and considered it a mistake to elect gentlemen that were not in touch with the Association to which they belonged. The Hon. Sec. said the Standing Committee recommended the re-election of those Hon. Members who had hitherto attended the meetings and of those present at the meeting.
The President said that the object of Honorary Membership was not to confer a distinction, but to enable the Council to obtain the services of any important workers who might not be returned as representatives.
On the motion of the Rev. F. E. Robinson, seconded by Mr. Rees, the following were elected: Rev. Canon Wigram, Messrs. Wakley, Pettit, F. E. Ward, Hounslow, and J. C. Mitchell.
The balance-sheet showed balance from last year £34 7s. 1½d., subscriptions, £8 15s. 0d. from other sources 6s. 1d., making a total of £43 8s. 2½d. The expenditure was £3 5s. 2d., leaving a balance of £40 3s. 0½d. The balance-sheet having been previously audited by the Standing Committee, was adopted on the motion of the Rev. G. F. Coleridge, seconded by Mr. Debenham.
The name of Mr. T. Lockwood was added to this Committee, which was re-elected on the motion of Mr. J. Griffin, seconded by Mr. Grove.
Decisions of the Council.
The President reported that the Standing Committee recommended that the decisions of the Council should be published at the conclusion of each Triennial term in a convenient form, and copies sent to the members of the Council and Secretaries of the various Associations, so as to make them known as widely as possible.
The Rev. F. J. O. Helmore asked if it would not be possible to print the decisions of the Council in the reports of the various Associations.
The Hon. Sec. did not think they had any power in that direction.
Mr. Taylor had no doubt the past decisions, if printed, would be found useful in various parts of the country, and proposed the suggestion be carried out.
Mr. Newson seconded, and the motion was adopted.
Next Year’s Meeting.
The President reported that the Standing Committee recommended that next year’s meeting should be at Sheffield, and it was thought that after giving their friends in the north a turn they might pay a visit south and go to Brighton the next year.
Mr. Hattersley proposed that Sheffield should be selected for next year’s meeting.
Mr. Attree in seconding, promised that the Council should have a hearty welcome at Brighton the year following if it was decided to come there.
The motion was carried.
Addition to Rule VIII.
The President in moving the following addition to rule VIII. “At the Annual meeting next after a Triennial Election, members of any Committee who have not been re-elected to the Council shall (when such a Committee has a report to present), have the right to attend and vote upon any motion arising exclusively out of that Report,” said it would seem that there was a necessity for such a clause. If a member of the Council was elected upon a Committee, but not re-elected a representative by the Association of which he was a member, without such a clause he would not have the power to attend and support any report which might be presented by the Committee. This clause would however give him the power to attend, speak and vote only upon the subject dealt with in the report.
Mr. Debenham seconded, and the motion was adopted.
Mr. Snowdon, in moving the following addition to rule XI. “That a member of any one Association, in the absence of his fellow Representatives, whose proxies on a given question or questions are produced in writing, may record their votes,” said this addition to the rule was very desirable, for it would enable those, who lived a long distance from the place of meeting and found it somewhat difficult to reach the meeting because of the expense to send their votes by proxy. The expense to working men to attend a meeting of the Council at a distance was a matter of some importance. He knew of one working man in that room that had come a long distance at his own expense, but it was not every working man that could do that, in fact there were few working men that could give the time and defray their own expenses. This was a question which concerned those in the North, for no doubt in the course of time the meetings would drift toward London. When subjects had been ventilated he considered that members should be empowered to send their votes by proxy.
Mr. Lockwood seconded, remarking there was a desire in the north that proxy voting should be allowed.
The Hon. Sec. said his views upon the matter had not altered in the least. He objected to the principle, for if adopted it would deprive the Associations of their full representative power; it would tend to thin the meetings of the Council and so deprive it of some of its debating power. It would also be, he considered, unfair to small Associations which sent up their representative. In his opinion it was as heavy an expense to these small Associations to send their representatives as it was to the Yorkshire Association to send its full number.
Mr. Attree said he had changed his views upon the subject. He considered that all Associations should send their full number of representatives to the meetings.
The Rev. A. D. Hill said he had before supported the proposal, and had not at present altogether changed his views. He thought that the question of limitation would have a great deal to do with the matter. One of the great functions of the Council was to guide the Exercise. If a question had been propounded at one of the Council meetings he saw no reason why the following year a member should not come back prepared with the full voting power of the representation of his Association. It would not be every question which would have to be submitted in this way, but it would be the means of obtaining the full power of those Associations that were a long distance from the place of meeting.
The Rev. H. J. Elsee said he could not see the good that would be done in permitting proxy voting while it might deprive the Council of the opinions of the whole four representatives of an Association. He should however be prepared to support a compromise by a limitation to those questions which had been thrashed out.
Mr. Snow having spoken in opposition to the resolution,
Mr. Foskett said he did not think that proxy voting would tend to thin the attendance, while it would prove very convenient in saving expense to some of the Associations and save members’ time. He thought, however, it should be done in writing and confined to those questions which had been before the Council.
Mr. Snowdon said it should be remembered that some of the representatives had great difficulty in getting to the place of meeting, as an instance, he himself had to travel sixty miles the previous day in order to be present at the meeting. It had been said that the Council was not a law-making body, but it might become such; if so, they must have representation. Another question which they had to consider, was how were they going to get the Exercise to abide by the decisions of the Council, if Associations did not have their full voting power. If limitation was to be adopted, the question of distance should be included, and it might be confined to those over a 100 miles from the place of meeting. If however this was to be considered, it had better go to a Sub-Committee. He had been deputed by the Yorkshire Association to obtain proxy voting if possible, and should do his best to do so.
The President said the great objection to proxy voting was that it would reduce the number of attending representatives and so impair the debating power of the Council.
The resolution was lost by a large majority.
The Church Congress.
The President said he had to apologise for a serious neglect of Central Council business. Owing to a death in his family which necessitated continued absence from home, his application on behalf of the Committee appointed to negotiate with the authorities of the Church Congress was made too late. Last year it was made in March, through and under the advice of the Bishop of Coventry. This year his application, owing to the circumstance he had already mentioned, was postponed till the same date, under the impression that this would be sufficiently early. He had, however, received a reply from the secretary that the Subjects Committee had already decided upon the list of subjects.
The Hon. Sec. said the question had been considered by the Standing Committee, and it had been suggested that a sort of side show might be held at Exeter during Congress week. It was thought this might take the form of a lecture with illustrations of change-ringing on handbells and models.
Mr. Snowdon said he should be very much against a side show.
Mr. Rees said, he thought that the only way would be to do something that would interest those that attended the Church Congress and so draw their attention to bells and bell-ringing. Would a side show do this? would there be any other than ringers that would attend?
The Rev. T. L. Papillon said from his experience in endeavouring to bring the subject before a Diocesan Conference he did not think there was much chance of getting the subject before the Church Congress. He approved of what Mr. Rees had said, but would not express an opinion as to what should be done. He had himself communicated with one of the Canons at Exeter but was too late.
The Rev. W. S. Willett suggested a week’s ringing as a means of doing some good.
Mr. Dawe doubted if ringing peals during Congress week would do the cause much good.
The Rev. H. A. Cockey said, to attract the outsiders, they must not attempt to show the intricacies of the art. The aim should be to show what bad hanging did to the church towers. This would be one way to interest them, it was no use attempting to do anything by sounds.
The Rev. G. F. Coleridge said, when he spoke to one of the Canons of Exeter upon the matter, he was told that it was great nonsense to attempt to get the subject included at the Church Congress.
The President thought the clergy were divided into two classes, one, the highly interested, the other, the totally ignorant. They should aim to get hold of the latter. He did not think a side show would do this. He suggested that the Committee should be re-appointed.
The Committee, consisting of the President, Rev. Canon Wigram, Rev. T. L. Papillon, and the Hon. Sec., was re-appointed on the motion of the Rev. A. H. Boughey, seconded by the Rev. G. F. Coleridge.
The Rev. H. A. Cockey said he would suggest that a Sub-Committee be appointed to make, if possible, some arrangements to do something during the Church Congress week. There were many, he was sure, desirous of knowing something about their bells, and some arrangements might no doubt be made which would assist them. It must not however take the form of a lecture on change-ringing.
The Rev. C. D. P. Davies said there were not only clergy but there were laity, including churchwardens, whom they wanted to take an interest in the matter.
The Rev. A. D. Hill said as one that took part in the Reading Conference he considered it a failure. Lord Nelson was in the chair, but with the exception of the chairman, those present were undoubtedly all ringers. At Plymouth, Mr. Troyte’s paper had the effect of bringing about the early belfry reform in Cornwall and Devonshire, for it was afterwards printed, and one met with it everywhere. He remembered upon going to the Olympia putting a penny in the slot and there were ten men to be seen ringing (laughter). This was all the outside public thought of ringing. If they wanted to be successful they must fit up a model belfry and so show the outside public that it was not a place only relegated to cobwebs. True they had not yet a government inspector to visit belfries (laughter) but there was a great deal to do in the direction he had referred to.
The following were appointed: Revs. H. A. Cockey, G. F. Coleridge, A. D. Hill, W. S. Willett, with Mr. Phillott.
Mr. Strange, on behalf of the Standing Committee, reported as follows:-
“The work of accumulating titles for the publication of a Bibliography has progressed satisfactorily during the past year: and it is now possible to take steps towards publishing the matter in hand. I have now 200 titles ready for press, for the most part in the archæological section. The Editor of “The Bell News” has kindly offered to print these in the columns of his paper from time to time in order to give readers an opportunity of making corrections or additions. At the conclusion of this process, the matter can be cast into its final form and published as a pamphlet. I estimate a total of 350 titles, which would run to about 30 pp. of a small octavo book, excluding introductory notes, etc. If the Council approves I will commence printing the titles in “The Bell News” as soon as convenient to the Editor, who should, I think, be thanked for his offer of assistance.”
In supporting the report Mr. Strange said he thought it would be desirable to have the report printed so that those desiring one could have a copy and make additions from time to time. It was impossible for one member to make it complete. He was of opinion that the work would be found nearly complete, so far as it related to the science. If it was to be continued with respect to bell founding and books on ringing he should be glad of the assistance of those that had such and could help him.
The President said Mr. Strange had done the whole of the work, and he thought the thanks of the Standing Committee and the Council were due to him for the pains he had taken. He would suggest that the matter should be referred back to the Committee, so that Mr. Strange could continue the work.
This course was adopted on the motion of the Rev. T. L. Papillon, seconded by Mr. S. Reeves.
The report will be continued in our next issue.
The Bell News and Ringers’ Record, April 7, 1894, pages 565 to 567
Report of Committee on Calls, and Classification of Compositions.
This Committee, consisting of the Rev. C. D. P. Davies, Mr. C. H. Hattersley, and Mr. N. J. Pitstow (the latter having taken the place of Mr. J. W. Washbrook), presented a printed report.
The substance of the “Recommendations as to calls” is the same as last year. The Committee here append a few extracts containing the chief points discussed this year for the first time.
As they will have frequent occasion to advert to calls either identical with or strictly parallel to the ordinary bob, the regular single, the 5th’s place bob, and the Holt’s single above-mentioned, it will be well to adopt at once an abbreviation for each of them. Indeed there is considerable need of a compendious form of notation indicative of the various legitimate kinds of calls in Triples. We accordingly propose the following in which, in addition to the four calls above specified, we include an abbreviation for the plain lead. They are P. for plain lead; B. for the ordinary bob; S. for the regular single; T. for the 5th’s place or continuous triple bob, and H. for the Holt’s single. In all triple methods it is to be understood that these various calls are to be employed under the same restrictions as those laid down in the case of Grandsire. Thus the composer is to be quite unfettered in his use of P and B, and S is left to his discretion. But in one and the same peal he may employ T only five times or H twice; nor must either of these be employed at all in the company of S, or of each other.
In continuing to recommend the adoption in the Union method of a single of the form
The Committee remark: against this form of single certain arguments have been brought. These are in the main (a) that it introduces the making of 4th’s place, a feature alleged to be alien to the Union method; (b) that it would not work well in Caters and Cinques. It seems also to have been inferred that (c) peals already, composed with the old single would be put out of course by the adoption of the single now recommended.
Now, first of all, it should be understood that the Grandsire single is no model for any other single. Any respect due to it is owing simply to its age, and not to its origin. It is a development of the single in Doubles. The primitive fathers of ringing found that on arriving at the 6oth row there was no alternative but to stop the interchange of one pair of bells. They therefore blindly wrote 13245. This was a single change. The name “Single” hence took its rise, and this form of call was perpetuated on seven and the higher number of bells. Such it is, and such let it be. We do not for a moment seek to alter it. But in Doubles at least, the scientific form of single would have been
that is the making of the P place (5ths) and the making of the B place (3rds) and perforce the place between them. Therefore no argument in favour of the Clavis single in Union can be grounded upon any supposed similarity to the Grandsire single. It is possible that the thought of some such supposed analogy between the Grandsire and Union methods in general, and their singles in particular, may have given rise to the argument (a), that a 2nd’s place single is more akin to the Union method than a 4th’s place one would be.
But when once the air is clear of the vapours of Grandsire, it is plainly evident that the making of 2nds place is quite as alien, if not more so, to the Union method as the making of any other place. Hence, though it may savour of tu quoque, it is an answer to this argument simply to say that the making of 2nds place has no business to occur in Union. But further, the 2nds place and its concomitant 3rds are gratuitously made a blow later than necessary, thereby not merely infringing the integrity of the 14 rows composing a lead, but introducing a bastard bob-change which by thus slinking in too late testifies only to its own disgrace. As part of the objection being now considered it is argued that the making of the 4ths place, besides being in itself alien to the method, causes the whole duty of the bell making that place to exhibit a like deformity. But surely those who thus contend are very short-sighted in their contention. It is obvious to reply that the old single causes two bells to do work unheard of in orthodox Union, not to say that one of them is made to contort itself in a manner positively acrobatic.
Was it ever heard that in a legitimate triple method the bell leaving the hunt should lie three blows in 3rds place? On the other hand, in the single recommended for your adoption, there is but one bell doing work different from that which every Union ringer has to do in every touch he rings.
That work, so far from being alien to the method, is actually the vis-a-vis of the 4ths place bell in every plain lead! It comes down, makes 4ths and dodges 4-5 up - the perfect complement of the bell that makes 5ths and dodges 4-5 down, the two working together like partners in a dance.
In the objection (b), that the single recommended would not work well in Caters and Cinques, we confess that we see no force whatever. It therefore requires no answer. We may, however, observe that so far as concerns practical ringing, precisely the same arguments in its favour hold good in the case of nine and eleven bells as that in Triples; and so far as regards composition all that can be said is that with the vast range of choice at his disposal, the composer must indeed be a poor one who is unable to work up his bells to the position requisite for any Single whatsoever.
It only remains to say a few words in reply to objection (c), that the new single would put old peals out of court. We are not aware of the existence of such a large number of these old peals; and we beg leave to refer to the peal given on page 23, where it is shown how the veriest novice may in a few moments substitute the new single for the old. We do not hesitate to affirm that a slight expenditure of ordinary intelligence will enable the conductor to vary any old peal on lines similar to those on which we have ourselves varied that given in the Clavis, Should, however, any hesitation be felt as to the advisability of altering old peals furnished with the Clavis single, we have no objection to their remaining as they are. They are bad, they are no affair of your Committee, whose duty looks to future, and not to the past.
Like the two methods, Reverse Oxford and Reverse Court, the true H in Union is necessary at the reverse, and may be employed if thought desirable. It will then occur in the following rows:-
If the 2nd is in the hunt-
Or, if the 2nd is in position to enter the hunt at the lead-end-
Otherwise we cannot do better than adhere to the form found in Holt’s six-part peal of Union Triples.
Passing to the remaining methods included in this group we have now to consider Oxford Bob, Double Oxford, Court Bob and Double Court, to which may be added the less desirable Reverse Oxford and Reverse Court.
Of these, Oxford Bob and Double Court, though differing from one another in the interior of the lead, have their plain and bob-lead-ends identical. Hence all compositions on the one are good for the other, and for our present purpose they may be considered together. They are perfectly regular. At the first blow of the treble’s lead 5ths place is made at P, and in perfect conformity with the principle advocated by your Committee; B is made by the substitution of 3rds place for 5ths. The proper form of S is therefore self-evident - the bells in 3-4-5 lie still thus-
Here, as in all similar cases the bell making 3rds does B work, that making 5ths does P work, and only one, viz., that making 4ths, does special work.
For H it need scarcely be pointed out that, as the plain and reverse courses have the same lead-ends as those in Grandsire, Holt’s singles should be used, under of course the same restrictions as are laid down previously.
For T there is only one form available. At P 5th’s is made, at B 3rd’s is made, and therefore for T there only remains the making of 7th’s place thus-
The use of this, be it remembered, should be confined to the instances quoted before.
The rules for the calls in Double Oxford and Court Bob are practically the same as those for Oxford Bob and Double Court, just explained, and serve only as additional proof, if such were wanted, of the soundness and scientific basis of the principles we advocate. Not to expatiate more than necessary, we simply give the figures shewing the form of calls recommended. To these for the sake of ready comparison we prefix the P of each method.
|DOUBLE OXFORD BOB.||COURT BOB.|
The same principle as that which determined the form of the H in Oxford Bob and Doable Court decides its form in the present methods of Double Oxford and Court Bob. It is simply identical with the H in Grandsire.
We append calls for the two methods of Reverse Oxford and Reverse Court which are however comparatively worthless owing to the fact that as in Grandsire 7ths place is made at P. They disturb five bells at B; they molest two at S; and if H be employed it must be as in Union at the reverse. Moreover in Reverse Oxford, if the following scheme of calls be adopted, the B block consists of only two members, so that it becomes doubtful whether any peal is possible under the circumstances. In fact neither of the methods are worth more than a cursory glance, and find a place here merely because Shipway gives a lead of each.
|REVERSE OXFORD.||REVERSE COURT.|
With regard to the S in both these methods it may be remarked that there is a conceivable alternative, by substituting the making of 4ths place instead of 6ths place as given above. The single will then be a “plain-lead” single, that which we have adopted being a “bob-single.” They both preserve intact the work of the bells making the P place and the B place; the difference between them being that the result of the plain-lead-single is the same as that of P with the interchange of one pair, the result of the bob-single is perhaps the best as more likely to tend to lessen the number of calls in a peal. It is generally easy to substitute a bob-single for a bob, whereas a plain-lead-single usually appears as an extra call.
On group iv. the final sentences in last year’s Report are modified as follows. It should however be stated that though eight forms of starting are logically allowable, they are not all by any means recommended. Of the eight forms the following seem most to be preferred.
First: that the first row of changes should be the fifth row at a quick six. This is the usual form of commencement and has old custom on its side. Second: that the first row of changes should be the third row in a quick six. This causes the first six-end to be 312456789. Anything legitimate which avoids waste of time and bobs in getting the bells into peal-ringing order cannot lightly be excluded.*
And this mode of beginning has the great merit of putting the treble at once into 2nd’s place. Third: the first row of changes may be the first row of a slow six. This form has the recommendation of leaving the composer greater freedom in the manner of coming home.
N.B. By resolution of Council, however, our last extract is cancelled.
In moving the adoption of the Report, the Rev. C. D. P. Davies said both he and Mr. Hattersley regretted to have lost the assistance of Mr. Washbrook. Their warmest thanks were due to Mr. Pitstow for having so promptly come forward to take Mr. Washbrook’s place. As to the report it would speak for itself. It must be understood that the copies which had been circulated, were only proofs. In the letter-press would be found one or two errors which would be corrected before the report itself was printed. There were two or three points to which he would briefly refer. It might be argued that the recommendations were hazy on the subject of the Holt’s single in Union, and reverse Court, and reverse Oxford. The true Holt’s single is at the reverse, and must be there if you have a ten-part peal with the leads of the plain course for part-ends in one half and leads of reverse course for part-ends in the other half. If however you have a peal on some other plan, of which Holt’s six-part and Mr. James’s on page 26 of the report are instances, you can have a Holt’s single at the treble lead. In these instances the Committee have no desire to fetter composers unnecessarily, and therefore leave the exact form of the Holt’s single to the composer. Holt chooses one form, Mr. James another; the Committee admit both, as they both conform equally to rules that they consider vital. The first single covers the blow at which the bells would otherwise come round, and the second single actually brings them home. The peal on page 17 was one he received a year ago from Mr. Sevier. Mr. James had however informed him that in the interval there had been some correspondence in “The Bell News” - which had escaped his notice - and Mr. Sevier had given up his claim to the peal. He regretted that it had been credited to the wrong person, but it would be set right before the report was finally printed. Probably no one would blame him for the errors, for no one could be expected to remember what appeared in “The Bell News” in the course of twelve months. He trusted however that Mr. James would accept his sincere apology for having blunderingly transposed the peal on page 20 in such a manner that at the end it could not be brought round by any recognised call. There was also an error in Mr. Catchpole’s peal of Stedman Cinques. He was not sure if this was not a printer’s error, at any rate it would be set right. He might mention that the letterpress portion of the report was sent round to each member of the Committee, but the peals were divided into three sections.
Mr. C. H. Hattersley in seconding, said he had no hesitation in saying that better peals had been rung in Sheffield fifty years ago. If such peals as those inserted continued to be inserted, they would become a laughing stock in admitting such trash. It would be found that better things were done before some of them were born. If this work was going to be continued it would be taking away the column in “The Bell News” where a charge of 6d. was made for an insertion, and putting them into the hands of the Exercise free of cost. There ought certainly to be a charge made. It would be more appreciated for the Exercise would always appreciate a thing more for which he had to pay something. One thing which composers would have to do would be to prove their peals before sending them. He for one was not going to do it for them. He did not see why he should have to prove Stedman Triples, especially as such peals might turn out to be false. He would however stick to the work, but peals sent to him must be certified as true.
Mr. G. Newson said last year at Oxford he raised the question as to why any restriction should be placed upon the going-off in Stedman Caters; true a few verbal alterations had been made, but there were still the objectionable features. The author of the method started at the second change of a quick six. If the committee allowed four changes before starting why not a whole quick six as well as allowing the whole of a slow six? As the sixes occur alternately a quick six was as much a part of the method as a slow six, while a quick six gave the same facilities for coming round as a slow six. Although the report did not actually condemn the mode of starting, yet it would tend to cast a slur on several simple and musical compositions of recent years. He would move that it should be an instruction to the Committee not to permit of any violation of the method in starting.
The President suggested that it might be desirable to leave out the recommendations as to any specific modes of starting.
Mr. Hattersley asked what Mr. Newson would recommend.
Mr. Newson replied that a quick six was as legitimate as a slow six; he did not recommend either in preference to the other. He was willing to accept of the President’s recommendation.
This course was adopted, and the whole of the recommendations as to starting were ordered to be struck out.
Dr. Carpenter asked for an explanation of the sentence that “a peal is a round block.”
The Rev. C. D. P. Davies replied that the remarks on page 14 were written for and were only intended to apply strictly to groups 2 and 3. Doubtless such a thing as a peal of Treble Bob coming home at the snapping lead of the treble had been known, but they are far and few between, and serve no really useful purpose. The phrase was introduced simply to show the absurdity of allowing some special “go off” or “coming home” while forbidding a similar manipulation in the course of the peal. Nothing was said in group 4 as to a “round block.”
The President did not think it desirable that the report should again be gone fully into, as time would not permit this. He would suggest that the part of the report dealing with calls, which was carefully gone into at the Oxford meeting and only referred back to the Committee on points which had now been fully debated, should be adopted, and that the latter part, in which the Committee were only as yet feeling their way, and in connection with which they had had serious difficulties to contend with, should be referred back to them for further consideration and improvement; also that they should be reappointed, with power to add to their number.
Mr. Lockwood having asked a question as to the single recommended on page 8, and the Rev. C. D. P. Davies having replied, the letterpress portion of the report was adopted, as was also the suggestion of the President and the Committee be re-appointed, on the motion of the Rev. F. E. Robinson, seconded by Mr. Strange.
* It must here be mentioned that on this point your Committee are not unanimous, the comment of one of their number being “My recommendation for starting changes in Stedman Caters and Cinques is the usual way, viz.: 213547698, or 214365879 with a slow six.”
The Bell News and Ringers’ Record, April 14, 1894, pages 579 to 581
The Question of Cheap Railway Fares.
The Rev. H. A. Cockey, reporting on behalf of this Committee, said the Committee had not yet succeeded in getting what was wanted. It was at first thought that it would be desirable to communicate with the individual railway companies and see what could be obtained from each. It was however thought best to collect information as to how many members there are in each Association, the number of the meetings held, etc., and put the whole before the authorities at the Railway Clearing Houses. It was intended to ask for tickets at single fares to those who could produce their receipt and show that they were travelling in connection with the Association to which they belonged. This it was thought would encourage ringers to travel about and meet one another as much as possible. It was understood that members of fishing clubs were granted these privileges, and the Committee saw no reason why the same should not be granted to ringers (laughter). There were some companies which granted tickets to ringers at single fares, and it was hoped that these would support the application when it came before the authorities at the Clearing House.
The President thought the Committee were to be congratulated upon going direct to the fountain head. He suggested the re-appointment of the Committee.
This was agreed to.
Priority of Notice.
Mr. Attree said he gave notice of two motions at the last Council Meeting and he desired to know why they appeared at the end of the list as not forwarded in conformity with the rules.
The President said the Hon. Secretary was in this difficulty, that if the rules in such matters are not accurately conformed to, he could not transact his business properly. The rules stated that notices of motions must be sent a month before the meeting, counter-signed by another member. Mr. Attree’s notices were not given in accordance with the rules, and the Hon. Secretary was right in placing them thus upon the agenda, but the rule in this case certainly appeared to work a little harshly, and might be amended.
Mr. Attree afterwards handed in his notice of motions for next year’s meeting, and said that as his resolutions had been ruled out of order, he should not now press them. It was his intention to have called attention to the fact that although the resolution against publishing under the name of more than one Association was carried last year without a single dissenting voice, yet there were peals frequently appearing under the names of two and three Associations. He hoped that secretaries of Associations would bear in mind that these should only be entered in one peal-book.
In the absence of Mr. Pritchett, the Rev. H. J. Elsee moved:
“That a Committee be appointed to consider the propriety of establishing a Benevolent Fund for the benefit of veteran ringers in poor circumstances, and, if deemed advisable, to report upon the best means of carrying such a scheme into effect.” In support of the proposal he said he considered such a fund would be a benefit to many ringers. There were frequent appeals in “The Bell News” for veteran ringers which generally met with a hearty response. A fund to meet such appeals would bring ringers more together and unite them in closer brotherhood.
Mr. Grove seconded.
The President pointed out that the Council could not undertake to manage such a fund; if adopted it would have to be worked by a body distinct from the Council.
Mr. Snowdon said to adopt such a proposal would be most dangerous. There were friendly societies in existence to which all ringers should belong. A man should look to his trade and not to his recreation for an organization to support him. He should be sorry to vote against the proposal for fear it might be said that he was not prepared to stand by the working man, but he must protest against it for it would be raising false hopes. When the Yorkshire had such a case among its members it endeavoured to meet it, and he thought this was the best way to deal with such cases. The proposal was one which would be best left in the hands of individual associations, and if any of these associations had a case they could not meet, let them appeal to others.
After some discussion as to the appointment of a Sub-Committee it was resolved to adjourn the question to the next meeting of the Council that the author of the motion might attend.
Technical Terms in Ringing.
The Hon. Sec. in moving the following,
“That a Committee be appointed to revise the technical terms used in connection with the Art of Ringing, to suggest such corrections as may seem desirable, and to prepare a Glossary for the use of learners,”
said he considered it would be apparent to those present that there was a necessity to take some steps in this matter. It was one which, if a Committee was appointed, would take two years to complete, as it would be necessary for them to first bring up their report upon the first part of the resolution and afterwards proceed with the Glossary.
After a brief discussion it was resolved to strike out the word ‘revise’ and insert the word ‘consider,’ after which the following Committee -were appointed on the motion of the Hon. Secretary, seconded by Mr. Attree. The President and Hon. Sec., Messrs. Dains, Pitstow, Snowdon and the Rev. C. D. P. Davies.
Definition of Peals of Minor.
Mr Lees, in the absence of Mr. Story, moved the following: “that an addition be made to the definition of a peal on six bells allowing of fourteen 360s, or any greater number of true portions of true Minor Methods, no two being the same, each portion to exceed a plain course, and the whole to reach a total of 5000 changes, or more.”
Mr. Lees having read a letter from Mr. Story, said the latter thought that the Council had taken a wrong course in the matter and that the previous decision was too hastily come to.
The Rev. G. F. Coleridge in seconding, said he had himself taken part in such a performance and considered it a creditable one.
Mr. Snowdon, stating that he was in entire sympathy with the motion, expressed his thanks to Mr. Story for having defended this question at the Oxford Meeting in his, the speaker’s, absence. He feared however that the matter was not yet in its best form. The Yorkshire Association Committee had the matter under their consideration, and he felt sure it would come out of their hands in a shape that would stand against the Council, whom he thought had not half considered the matter. Mr. Snowdon then quoted from the last report of his Association the whole paragraph of which we annex:-
“In our recent Reports we have expressed our interest in the doings of the Central Council, which we have so far supported to the best of our ability. We greatly regret that we find ourselves unable to fall in with their last decision on the question of Minor peals in a multiplicity of methods. A more, to us, unsatisfactory decision could not have been given, and we reluctantly consider it our duty to act in opposition to it. We hope to report further on this matter because such peals may possibly be open to some slight theoretical objection on account of no complete set of 720 changes being then and there rung as a foundation on which to build the repetitions which custom has allowed. The point is a somewhat fine one, but it will be well to put the matter into the best possible form - practically and theoretically - and then leave time to act as the referee.”
Mr. Snowdon added, that in his opinion the Council had much to learn on this six-bell question.
Mr. James called attention to the possibility of ringing fourteen 360s in plain methods by starting in one method, calling a single at the end and turning into another method without the bells coming round until the completion of the 720, so as to ensure rounds or any other change coming only seven times in a 5040.
The President said Mr. Jas. Wilde had sent him a true 720 consisting of several methods. If seven such 720s could be composed he would be the first to congratulate the northerner upon the performance of such a peal. It was clearly the duty of the Council to formulate as high a standard as possible in all ringing matters. It was only out of consideration for six-bell ringers that the Exercise had come to allow seven true 720s to constitute a peal. To repeat any change more than seven times was unduly to lower the standard. Let Yorkshiremen, if they wanted to ring fourteen methods, emulate the splendid achievement of their district in such performances as the notable peal of 16,000 in twenty-one methods. The Council did not desire to coerce the Yorkshire Association, whose members could not be forced to come up to the standard, but ringers that did so would, he thought, stand higher in the opinion of the Exercise at large.
Mr. Snowdon said a hope was expressed that “The Bell News” would not publish anything that the Council did not approve of, and Mr. Attree was asked not to include such performances in his list; was not this coercion?
Mr. Attree said it was so, and the list which would appear that week would show that such peals had been omitted.
Mr. Snowdon thought this was doing more than pointing the way.
The President said the Council could not enforce anything upon anyone, but they would endeavour to get their decisions, carried by such large majorities, adopted as far as possible.
Mr. Lockwood said it was more difficult to ring fourteen 360’s than to ring seven 720s. By not adopting the resolution the Council was not encouraging those in the art that had the ability to accomplish such performances.
Mr. Snowdon: It is said that the Council is showing us the way. We say we are showing you the way.
The Rev. C. D. P. Davies thought that the Council could not take any other course than it had already done.
The President pointed out that the question had been before three meetings of the Council. If any question had ever been thrashed out it was this one, and Mr. Snowdon was not correct in saying that the Council had not half considered the matter.
The resolution was put and lost by a large majority.
Handbell Peals and Umpires.
Mr. Newman, in moving the following:-
“That no peal rung upon handbells shall be considered worthy of record, unless vouched for by a competent umpire throughout the performance,”
said there had been handbell peals rung recently without any umpire, which he thought ought not to be acknowledged.
Mr. Dains seconded.
The Rev. C. D. P. Davies expressed an opinion that there should be two umpires.
Mr. Buckingham considered it necessary to define what a competent umpire was.
Mr. James said he had to raise his voice against the resolution. There were cases in which men met but an umpire could not be got; were they going to debar a band from doing anything upon such an occasion? He considered that so long as a band allowed the door to remain open so that anyone could enter, that peals should be permitted to be rung. He did not say that a band should close the door and bar it against the entrance of anyone, but if they adopted what he had suggested he did not see why such performances should not be credited.
The Rev. S. Willett asked why umpires should be required for handbell peals and not for peals rung in the tower.
The President replied that those outside the tower could and did sometimes listen to peals (laughter), whereas this was impossible in the case of handbell peals, which were therefore not open to public criticism.
Mr. Debenham suggested that a Committee should be appointed to consider how far such a resolution was desirable, and if so, what should be the duties of umpires.
Mr. Buckingham having seconded, the following committee was appointed: Messrs. Buckingham, Carter, Debenham, Newson, James, Winney, and Bastable.
A Column for Members of the Council.
Mr. Snowdon moved the following:
“That with a view to thorough ventilation of current questions and such subjects as are likely to be brought before the Council, it is desirable that (a) some special channel should be provided for the interchange of opinions by the Members of the Council between one meeting and another; and that (b) to that end the Editor of “The Bell News” be requested by the Council kindly to grant the privilege of a column set apart solely for the correspondence of Members of the Council. No letters to be published except above the actual name of the writer, to which must be annexed the name of the Society he represents. The President and Hon. Secretary to be empowered to regulate correspondence, if found necessary.”
In supporting the resolution, the mover said it appeared to him desirable that there should be some channel through which members of the Council could ventilate matters from time to time. It appeared to him that there was not sufficient time at the Council Meetings to thrash matters out, and so some things were passed by for the want of more time. His aim in moving the resolution was to enable members to deal with questions during the year. At the present they were going at a high pressure. There was not time enough to do the work. If adopted it would be the means of bringing them more in touch one with another. If they asked for information, those in possession of it could furnish it. It had been said that everyone would see what was going on. Well, what if they did. Parliament was doing the same thing. People saw what was done, and if it went wrong, there were soon meetings held to set it right (laughter). Of course it would be understood that no decision was to be arrived at in the columns of “The Bell News,” but that it was simply to afford the members an opportunity of thrashing out questions before they came to the Council meetings. As an illustration of the want of time at the Council meetings, Mr. Newson had started upon a discussion when, just as it was becoming interesting, Mr. Dains helping him, the President suggested the Sub-Committee should further deal with the matter, and there, for the present, it stood.
Mr. W. D. Smith seconded.
The Rev. C. D. P. Davies asked if a member of the Council would not be considered as transgressing the rules of propriety in writing upon Council matters.
A member asked if all could not correspond in “The Bell News.”
The President said according to the resolution this was to be a column set aside for the members of the Council only.
The Hon. Secretary said the Editor said he should be pleased to do so. He (the Hon. Sec)., thought, however, that if the resolution was adopted, it would be best to have a Sub-Committee to regulate the correspondence. It was a matter neither himself or the President were prepared to undertake. The President having concurred,
Mr. Snowdon said he would accept the amendment. His aim was to get the members of the Council in touch one with another.
The Rev. T. L. Papillon suggested that the whole of the last sentence should be struck out.
Mr. Strange thought the course proposed would be cumbersome to work. If the Associations had confidence in electing the members as representatives he thought they might be left to deal with matters at the Council without corresponding upon them.
The suggestion made by the Rev. T. L. Papillon was seconded and adopted, and the resolution carried.
The Rev. H. J. Elsee desired to know if a member of the Council was unable to attend whether another member of the same Association could do so.
The President replied that if a representative resigned, the Association to which he belonged could elect another at any time.
A vote of thanks to the President and Hon. Sec. having been passed, the members afterwards sat down to a dinner with the President in the Chair.
Through the kindness of the London ringers, the towers of St. Martin-in-the-fields, St. Michael’s, Cornhill, and others, were visited in the course of the evening.
The Bell News and Ringers’ Record, April 21, 1894, pages 590 to 591