PEAL VALUES COMMITTEE.
Report presented by the Committee to the Meeting of the Central Council, Whitsuntide, 1910.
Your Committee for Peal Values beg leave to report that since the last meeting of the Council the Analysis Committee has referred the following questions to them, viz.:-
(1) What is the number of points to be allotted to (a) Erin Triples, (b) Erin Caters, (c) Aston Major, (d) Aston Royal, and (e) Cambridge Surprise Maximus.
(2) They also asked for further consideration of the points to be given for peals of Minor, in connection with which Mr. King made a valuable suggestion.
In response to this your Committee advised that the following points should be allotted, viz.:-
|Cambridge Surprise Maximus||60|
They at the same time unanimously adopted Mr. King’s suggestion regarding peals of Minor as being more systematic, fairer, and altogether better than the plan hitherto employed. It takes the form of a sliding scale, as follows:-
|No. of Methods.|
|T. Bob Methods||4||6||8||10||12||14||16|
At the meeting of the Council last year the Hon. Secretary brought forward certain suggestions with a view to rendering the whole plan of apportioning points for peals more regular and systematic, and your Committee were instructed to consider the matter and report thereon. After consideration they now report that they recommend the scheme for final adoption by the Council. As was stated by the Hon. Secretary last year, the scheme, while leaving the relative position of the various performances almost untouched, introduces an element of system and arrangement where previously all was a matter of mere isolated and disjointed estimates. The only alteration of any importance introduced by the adoption of the scheme is that Stedman Caters have a higher number of points apportioned to them than are given to Triples. This, your Committee think, is amply justified when due account is taken of all the facts bearing upon the question.
In considering the various matters referred to us, the case of one or two methods not specifically named in the list given on p. 28 of “Rules and Decisions” (1904) has incidentally arisen and has received consideration. These are Duffield, Forward, and Norfolk (or Imperial Bob). Forward we place in Class 4 containing the Double Methods of which the Method value (V) is 18, while Duffield and Norfolk we assign to Class 5, the Double Norwich class where the Method value (V) is 25. (See schedule annexed).
|1||Plain Methods, Original, etc.||10||7||8||9||10||11||12|
|3||Treble Bob Methods, etc.||14||-||11||-||14||-||17|
|4||Forward, Erin, Aston, Double Methods, etc.||18||12||14||16||18||20||22|
|5||Double Norwich, Duffield, Norfolk, etc.||25||-||20||-||25||-||30|
|6||Stedman, New Cumberland, etc.||30||21||24||27||30||33||36|
|9||London (Stepney), etc.||64||-||51||-||64||-||77|
The number of bells multiplied by the Method value (V) and the product divide by 10 gives the number of points given to the peal.
Report on the Analysis of Peals for the Year ended 31 December, 1909.
We, the undersigned, being the Committee appointed by the Central Council last year, desire to report that we have completed the Peal Analysis for 1909. We have been confronted in the course of our investigations with certain difficulties, which should ordinarily have been referred to the Points Committee, but in view of the discussion last year which resulted in a general reference to that Committee of the best means of revising the present system of apportioning points for peals, we have dealt provisionally with such matters as have arisen, without troubling that Committee pending their decision on the general question.
It would certainly assist us in the compilation of these statistics, if a peal rung in December could find its way into print before March of the following year: and if greater care could be taken to avoid the publication of peals a second time. There are two instances of duplicate entries in the past year, and we can only remind those on whom the responsibility rests that these are a source of infinite trouble, and ought in common fairness to your Committee to be avoided.
The Bell News and Ringers’ Record May 7, 1910, page 160
ANALYSIS OF PEALS RUNG DURING THE YEAR 1909 AND PUBLISHED IN THIS PAPER. TABULATED ACCORDING TO VALUE IN POINTS.
The value allotted to Aston Royal (18), Major (16), Erin Caters (18), Triples (16) are provisional only, and are used by the Analysis Committee solely on this understanding, so that publication may not be delayed. Whatever value may be ultimately recommended to the Council by the Points Committee, it will not affect the positions of the Societies in this Analysis.
Note.- Two peals have been published twice, see “Bell News,” pages 81-151 and 475-535. The senders of corrected peals would save the Analysis Committee infinite trouble if in future they would give reference to the previous publication.
The 135 peals in Plain Methods comprise: Bob Maximus 2; Bob Royal 5; Bob Major 114; Oxford Bob Major 2; College Single Major 1; Canterbury Pleasure Major 1; Oxford Bob Triples 6; Bob Triples 4.
The 90 peals of Doubles are comprised in the following statement
|Bath and Wells||10||-||2||1||-||-||-||-||13|
|Gloucester and Bristol||-||1||-||-||-||-||-||-||1|
The 46 peals rung by Independent Societies are thus distributed, viz.: Bedfordshire 4; Berkshire 1; Breconshire 2; Cheshire 2; Derbyshire 2; Edinburgh 2; Essex 3; Gloucestershire 2; Lancashire 1; Leicestershire 2; Lincolnshire 1; Middlesex 11; Norfolk 3; Northamptonshire 1; Nottinghamshire 1; Surrey 2; Sussex 2; Warwickshire 2; Yorkshire 2. Total, 46.
The greatest number of changes in one peal was 18,027, viz., the record peal of Stedman Caters rung by the Midland Counties’ Association. One peal of 12,000 changes, Kent Treble Bob Major, and one peal of 10,080 changes in 7 Treble Bob Minor Methods were rung by the Lancashire Association. One peal, 11,040 changes of Double Norwich C.B. Major was rung by the Norwich Diocesan Association, One peal 10,176 changes of Double Oxford Bob Major was rung by the Worcester and Districts Association. One peal contained over 7,000 changes; three contained over 6,000 changes; and under 6,000 changes there were 1,619 peals.
The 222 peals of Treble bob were rung- in the Kent Variation- Maximus 6; Royal 25; Major 154; in the Oxford Variation- Royal 3; Major 32; and in the London Variation- Major 2.
The 313 peals of Grandsire Triples were- Holt’s Original 57; Holt’s Six-part 1; Holt’s Ten-part and Variations 83; Parker’s One-part 6; Parker’s Five-part 1; Parker’s Six-part 9; Parker’s Twelve-part and Variations 61; Carter’s Twelve-part and Variations 25; Taylor’s Bob and Single 19; Rev. C. D. P, Davies’s peals 12; Hollis’s 9; other peals 27; and three published without Composer’s name.
The 230 peals of Stedman were Thurstans’ One-part 3; Thurstans’ Four-part and Variations 193; Thurstans’ Ten-part 1; Carter’s peals 13; Washbrook’s peals 11; Bulwer’s peals 4; Heywood’s peals 3; Parker’s Seven-part 1; and John O. Lancashire 1.
Conductors of four peals and upwards were: Clement Glenn, 53; Keith Hart, 44; William Pye, 39; Frank Bennett, 31; F. R. Borrett, 30; R. Matthews, 27; B. Prewett, 26; William Short, 24; William Keeble, Benjamin A. Knights, and James Motts, 22; C. F. Bailey, 20; J. E. Davis, 19; George Williams, 17; William Willson, 16; A. H. Pulling, 15; C. W. Clarke, 13; E. G. Buesden, and the Rev. H. Law James, 12; J. Souter and W. Watts, 11; J. E. Groves, the Rev. F. E. Robinson, and Samuel Wood, 10; Arthur Knights, 9; W. H. Barber, John Carter, James Cotterell, David Elliott, L. S. Griffiths, T. T. Gofton, J. W. Lake, E. Morris, G. N. Price, and George F. Williams, 8; the Rev. A. T. Beeston, F. W. Dixon, E. C. Gobey, Joseph Griffin, P. J. Johnson, H. G. Judge, E. C. Lambert, W. Large, T. Metcalfe, and Henry J. Tucker, 7; John H. Cheesman, the Rev. E. V. Cox, Samuel Grove, E. Hancox, Charles R. Lilley, F. G. May, F. Palmer, George R. Pye, James Parker, the Rev. H. S. T. Richardson, Joseph Ridyard, Edwin Shephard, S. H. Symonds, W. Shepherd, A. Shufflebotham, Henry W. Wilde, and Bernard Witchell, 6; E. M. Atkins, Harry Chapman, R. F. Deal, J. W. Driver, William Fitchford. George H. Gale, R. T. Holding, sen., F. A. Holden, Charles Jackson, H. W. Kirton, Herbert Knight, Henry Moore, James Morgan, Wilfred Overton, Edward Reader, R. Sperring, Frank Smith, W. S. Smith, and Cecil A. Valentine, 5; John Austin, G. Billenness, L. Bullock, C. E. Borrett, E. Bannister, W. A. Cave, G. Edser, jun., John Flint, A. W. Gravett, F. Hopper, G. Holifield, sen., E. W. Menday, F. J. Mynard, John McKell, George R. Newton, W. T. Pegler, A. Simpson, R. E. Stavert, B. Thorpe, John Thomas, Sam Thomas, F. Wilford, Harry Wakley, G. Wightman, W. Welling, and E. Whitbread, 4. In addition to these, 60 persons conducted three peals each, 96 two peals, and 277 one peal. One silent peal was rung, and two peals were published without a Conductor’s name. The total number of persons who acted as conductors was 540.
The number of peals on church bells was 1,544; handbells 84.
In dealing with performances of especial merit, we congratulate the Band who at Loughborough on the 12th April, 1909, rang the record peal of Stedman Caters, consisting of 18,027 changes, in twelve hours and eighteen minuses, all being members of the Midland Counties’ Association. To call a peal of this length would tax the capacity of the ablest conductor, and Mr. William Pye, whose name has already been associated with many remarkable peals, is just one of those men who can always be trusted to rise to the occasion, and inspire the confidence needed to bring such a wonderful performance to a successful conclusion. Ten ladies have taken part in successful peals during the year 1909, viz., Miss E. N. Belcher two peals of Stedman Triples, Miss Isabella Frankum peals of Grandsire Doubles and Grandsire Triples for the Oxford Diocesan Guild; Miss Mabel Gilbanks two peals of Minor in five and seven methods, three peals of Stedman Triples and one of Stedman Caters for the Worcester and Districts Association; Miss Nellie Gillingham who rang in and conducted a peal of Grandsire Triples and is thought to be the first lady conductor of a successful peal, and Miss Mary E. N. Jukes a peal of Grandsire Triples for the Bath and Wells Diocesan Association; Miss Edith Parker who rang Stedman Triples, Superlative and London Surprise, being the first lady to accomplish successful peals in Surprise methods, for the Royal Cumberland Youths; Miss Margery Sampson who rang in a peal of Grandsire Triples for the Saint Mary’s Cathedral Society, Edinburgh; Miss Mildred E. Smith who rang in a peal of Minor for the Central Northamptonshire Association; Miss Alice White who rang in a peal of Grandsire Triples for the Winchester Diocesan Guild; and Miss Lilian Willson who rang in two peals of Grandsire Triples and one of Double Norwich Court Bob Major for the Midland Counties’ Association. The following is a summary of the peals rung on handbells-
|Kent Treble Bob Royal||2|
|Kent Treble Bob Major||1|
|Seven Treble Bob Minor Methods||1|
|Double Norwich Court Bob Major||1|
|Superlative Surprise Major||3|
The 1628 peals rung are 154 more than last year, and create a record, being 109 more than 1905. They were rung in the following months- January 151; February 148; March 104; April 128; May 155; June 97; July 102; August 89; September 165; October 141; November 168; December 180.
Note.- In reckoning points for peals, those over 7,000 and under 10,000 changes count as two peals; 10,000 and under 12,000 count as three peals, and so forth.
The following table gives the first twenty Societies and their relative positions since 1896:-
|Midland Counties Association||3||8||6||6||13||11||13||10||5||5||5||4||1||1|
|Norwich Diocesan Association||4||5||9||5||6||6||2||2||2||1||2||2||2||2|
|Middlesex County Association||-||25||18||9||4||1||1||1||1||2||1||1||3||3|
|Kent County Association||7||7||8||3||3||4||4||6||9||3||3||3||4||5|
|Oxford Diocesan Guild||1||3||2||1||1||2||3||4||8||8||6||5||6||6|
|Sussex County Association||2||1||1||2||5||3||7||3||7||7||17||10||7||7|
|Worcester and Districts Association||12||6||3||10||15||18||21||20||23||17||14||8||14||9|
|Gloucester and Bristol Association||13||12||7||11||11||9||6||7||11||14||13||22||12||11|
|Winchester Diocesan Guild||9||14||12||15||10||13||16||23||18||15||10||9||9||12|
|Hertford County Association||25||19||13||18||20||14||8||12||12||13||16||12||13||13|
|Durham and Newcastle Association||8||18||19||31||18||16||10||13||10||11||12||17||10||14|
|Royal Cumberland Youths||11||17||23||24||22||23||20||25||19||23||18||19||20||15|
|Saint Martin’s Guild||21||13||20||16||8||7||11||11||15||12||19||15||15||16|
|Lincoln Diocesan Guild||-||-||-||32||32||29||26||26||26||26||25||29||25||17|
|Society Archdeaconry of Stafford||15||21||17||13||19||19||17||18||25||21||21||13||18||18|
|Chester Diocesan Guild||19||24||22||23||21||20||19||22||28||20||9||23||19||19|
|Central Northants Association||18||10||14||14||16||15||22||14||14||16||22||20||16||20|
The number of peals rung annually since the publication of “The Bell News” are shown by the following table-
George P. Burton.|
Arthur T. King.
J. Armiger Trollope.
The Bell News and Ringers’ Record May 14, 1910, pages 174 to 176 and May 21, 1910, pages 186 to 188
THE CENTRAL COUNCIL.
The Second Session of the Seventh Council (the Twentieth Annual Meeting), was by kind permission of the Feoffees of the Chetham’s Hospital, Manchester, held in the schoolroom of the Institution on Whit Tuesday, May 17th, at which fifty-one members whose names appeared in our issue of May 21st, were present.
Sir Arthur Heywood, Bart., the President, took the chair at eleven o’clock.
The minutes of the last Annual Meeting having been read, the President said there was one matter arising out of the minutes to which he would briefly refer. At the last meeting he undertook to write to the Church Press in connection with the action of the Society for the Preservation of Ancient Buildings. It was understood that he would do this if particulars of the cases where the Society had injuriously interfered, were forwarded to him. The only case he had received details of was one that had occurred fifteen years ago, and he thought under those circumstances he had better leave the matter alone.
The Hon. Secretary announced that he had received letters expressing regret that they were unable to attend from the Revs. H. A. Cockey, M. Kelly, A. H. F. Boughey, and C. E. Matthews; and Messrs. C. E. D. Boutflower, C. E. Borrett, J. Clark, J. R. Sharman, J. W. Jones, F. B. Tompkins, and J. A. Trollope. He was sure, Mr. Davies continued, that the Council would share in the regret of Mr. Cockey, that he was for the first time unable to be present.
THE DEATH OF KING EDWARD.
The President said he desired to explain that when the news came of the death of King Edward, he had at once to decide if the meeting of the Council should be held or not. He communicated with the Hon. Secretary to the Council, and the President of the Lancashire Association, and it was decided, as this was purely a business meeting, and could not very well be postponed to another time of the year, that the meeting should stand. But as Churchmen, owing due respect to His late Majesty, they could not fitly hold the social gathering, and so notice to this effect had been given in “The Bell News.” He felt sure that the omission of the social gathering would be considered a proper act of respect.
THE LATE REV. F. E. ROBINSON.
The President moved the following resolution: “That the Central Council of Church Bell Ringers desire to place on record the great loss which the Exercise has sustained by the death of the Rev. Francis E. Robinson, who consistently, throughout a long life, set before ringers an example of high integrity and unfailing energy, and that the Council respectfully tender to Mrs. Robinson their deepest sympathy.” The President desired to move the resolution as a mark of respect for one of the greatest ringers the world had ever seen. At last year’s Council meeting Mr. Robinson was present, apparently, after a trying illness, in good health, and only a week before the rev. gentleman’s death, he, the President, had a letter from Mrs. Robinson, in which she wrote that he appeared much better; and yet within a week his almost sudden death had taken place. He, the President, was sure it was unnecessary for him to speak of the great good that had been done by the rev. gentleman, or of the noble example that he had set them as Churchmen throughout the length and breadth of the land; or that he should refer to the many virtues Mr. Robinson possessed. His whole life was a pattern set before the Exercise. He had a definite purpose in him, and always did his ringing to the glory of God, as was shown by his always offering previous to commencing a peal, and at the close, a short prayer in the belfry. The whole Exercise had sustained, an irreparable loss by the death of one who was affectionately regarded everywhere, and whose high example would have effect upon the lives of many ringers. He, the President, was sure that the Council would desire to express its deepest sympathy with Mrs. Robinson in her sorrow.
The Hon. Secretary seconded the resolution. He said he had lost one of his oldest ringing friends by the death of Mr. Robinson. His companionship, if he might so speak, with the rev. gentleman, extended over many years. He believed it was as far back as 1876 when Mr. Robinson called the first long touch of Grandsire Triples in which he, the speaker, took part. Since that he had rung with the rev. gentleman in 6, 10, and 12 bell towers. He had visited many places with the rev. gentleman, Squire Proctor’s among others, and had always met with unfailing kindness. It was Mr. Robinson’s thoroughness in everything that one could not but admire. He, the speaker, mentioned an incident showing how thorough he was in keeping of his accounts, and so it was in everything in which he was concerned. To him, the speaker, the loss was a great one, and so it was to the Exercise at large. It was unnecessary for him to refer to the noble example that the rev. gentleman had set the whole Exercise. He knew that within a very short time of the end he was arranging for peals, which, alas, the hand of death had prevented from taking place.
The Rev. H. J. Elsee said that on behalf of the Lancashire Association, he wished to be associated with the resolution. Mr. Robinson was remembered as a great and sincere friend by everyone. He recollected that upon one occasion, in preaching, the rev. gentleman remarked that he always thought that in his capacity for ringing he had received a special gift from God, and he trusted that he would leave that gift better than he received it.
The resolution was carried, every member of the Council standing.
The item No. 7 on the Agenda was taken next. This read as follows:-
“The Central Council desires to place on record its sense of the great services rendered to the cause of change-ringing by the late Rev. F. E. Robinson, and hopes that the members will further in their several Guilds and Associations the scheme for erecting a worthy memorial in Drayton Church.”
The Rev. G. F. Coleridge in moving the resolution, said he was sure no words of his were necessary to show the sterling work that had been done in the ringing world by their dear old friend, now no longer with them. After the death of the rev. gentleman, a meeting of the Oxford Diocesan Guild was held, and a desire was expressed that a permanent memorial should be erected. The question was raised whether it was to be carried out by the Oxford Diocesan Guild alone. As there were so many Associations and Guilds in England, of which the rev. gentleman was a member, it was thought that many ringers might desire to have the opportunity of subscribing, especially as there were so many of the Exercise to whom the rev. gentleman was so well-known. Mr. Robinson was one who was appreciated throughout England. He was at all times willing to assist by preaching at anniversary services and always willing to give advice when asked. He was looked up to and admired as a friend by all. Under these circumstances could it be otherwise than that many would desire to take part in the erection of a permanent memorial? He, the speaker, might also mention that the rev. gentleman had done some excellent oak carving in Drayton Church. The beautiful oak choir stalls, organ case, and bench ends were all done by him. It had been Mr. Robinson’s intention to complete the whole by the erection of a carved oak chancel screen, for which it was found, after his deaths that a design had been prepared. An architect had been consulted, and it was estimated that the cost would be £300. The Oxford Diocesan Guild had come to the conclusion that the screen would be the most worthy permanent memorial of the rev. gentleman’s great work for the Exercise, as it was a memorial which met with the approval of the family. The Oxford Diocesan Guild was desirous of having the opinion of the Central Council upon the matter, for they considered that the sum was too large to be raised without help, and as Mr. Robinson had also many friends who were not ringers, it was thought that if an appeal was made to them and to all the Associations and Guilds, there would be no difficulty in raising the amount required.
The Rev. C. W. O. Jenkyn, in seconding, said there had been many inquiries from different parts of the country to know if it was intended to erect a memorial. He had no doubt that those making inquiry would be pleased to contribute, and that all would agree that Drayton church was the right place for the memorial. He did not himself know of anything so fitting. It might the said the cost was large. So it was, but there must be a large number desirous of contributing besides the many friends of the rev. gentleman. With the support of the Council he had no doubt that the sum would be raised.
The Rev. H. S. T. Richardson said that he was sure the sum required could be collected with the help of the Exercise without difficulty. As a ringer he personally was indebted to the rev. gentleman for everything, and in this he did not stand alone
Canon Papillon said he should be pleased to give the resolution his support, and had no doubt that the various Associations and Guilds would take the matter up when it was brought before them, especially as the object was so worthy. He had been much struck with the thoroughness of the rev. gentleman. As most of those present no doubt were aware, every sheet of “Among the Bells” had passed through his bands, and he, the speaker, could not but admire the extraordinary manner in which Mr. Robinson kept a true account of everything that he did.
The Rev. J. M. Clarkson asked the object of appealing outside the Exercise.
The Rev. G. F. Coleridge said it was not only because of the amount that would be required but because of the many friends of the rev. gentleman who might wish to contribute. If the idea was carried out it was proposed to affix a plate stating that the screen was erected by the ringers of England and friends.
After a few words from the Rev. W. W. C. Baker,
The President said he did not think the sum at all excessive, neither did he think there would be any difficulty in raising the amount required, as so many would be desirous of giving something. It should however be borne in mind by those present that in voting for the resolution it would be their duty to bring the matter before their Associations and Guilds.
The resolution was unanimously adopted.
The Hon. Secretary read the accounts, of which the following is a brief summary: Balance last year £43 4d.; Affiliation fees, £11 17 6; sale of Publications, £2 15 9; making a total of £57 13 7. The expenditure included expenses of last year’s meeting £4 2 0, postages, etc., 13s. 6d., leaving a balance of £52 18 1. This, with the value of Publications on hand estimated at £95 2 7, after deducting the commission for sales, would bring the total assets to the value of £148 0 8. The Publications on hand with Messrs Geo. Allen and Son, Ruskin House, 44 and 45 Rathbone Place, Oxford Street, were as follows: On the Preservation of Bells, 306; Report on Catalogue of Peals and Calls (1894) 17; Glossary of Terms, 1915; Model Rules for an Association (1902), 75; Model Rules for a Company (1902), 461; Collection of Peals (sec. 1) , 686; do. (sec. 2), 798; do. (sec. 3), 934; Collection of Legitimate Methods, 857; Rules and Decisions of the Council, 338; Bells and Belfries, 23.
On the proposition of Mr. J. Griffin, seconded by the Rev. F. Coleridge, the accounts, which had been audited by the Standing Committee, were passed, the seconder bearing testimony to the perfect order in which the accounts were kept.
The Hon. Secretary said in 1906 by an oversight Mr. C. H. Hattersley’s name was omitted from the Standing Committee, and last year the Committee as elected in 1906 was re-elected. He now desired to add Mr. Hattersley’s name to the Committee.
Mr. G. Bolland seconded, and the motion was adopted.
The President said that there were three retiring hon. members, viz.: Revs. A. H. F. Boughey and H. T. Richardson, with Mr. W. H. Thompson. These the Standing Committee recommended for election. He understood that the name of Mr. Joseph Parker, of Sunderland, had been suggested as an hon. member by the Rev. H. S. Richardson, if so it would be well to hear Mr. Richardson on the subject.
The Rev. H. S. T. Richardson said he had met Mr. Parker and knew something of the work that he was doing. Mr. Parker was deeply interested in composition, and would, he considered, be a useful man on the Council, which he would strengthen.
Dr. Carpenter asked if it was known whether Mr. Parker would be willing to act if elected.
The Rev. H. S. T. Richardson said he had not had the opportunity of asking Mr. Parker, but he had no doubt if elected that Mr. Parker would be pleased to act.
The President said it was better that consent of any one to act should be first obtained, but there was no rule to that effect.
Dr. Carpenter proposed, and the Rev. W. W. C. Baker seconded, the re-election of the three retiring Hon. Members, and the addition of Mr. Parker.
This was agreed to.
The Bell News and Ringers’ Record June 4, 1910, pages 208 to 209
THE TREBLE BOB COLLECTION OF PEALS.
The Rev. H. S. T. Richardson said he had thought that as Mr. Trollope was not present, a report would have been sent in. In Mr. Trollope’s absence he could only report that the third and fifth parts of the collection of Treble Bob peals had been proved, and there was no reason why one of the instalments should not shortly be published. Some twelve or fifteen peals, not more, had been thrown out by Mr. Trollope, who had done much of the work. It had not been possible to find out in every case to whom a composition belonged, but the Committee had not failed to make every effort in this direction.
The Hon. Secretary said he could assure the Council that steady progress had been made. He thought it desirable that the Council should say if the date and place of the first performance of a peal should be given or not, which might be some guide in some instances as to whom the peal belonged, not that he thought the Committee or the Council should be held in any way responsible for correct authorship. At present he thought the work was sufficiently advanced to make it to make it fairly complete. The President had reminded him that proving peals was decided on last year. The only questions still undecided were those on inserting first performances. Upon this point Mr. Trollope had written him a letter in which he said: “So far as the peal collection goes, we have only to report steady progress, but I should the Council to say whether the first performances are to be given or not. As you know, the materials exist pretty fully, but we cannot guarantee either that the performances we have are really in every case the first, or that the list is complete. All that we can say is that we have enough to make it fairly accurate if the Council wish them given. I should be sorry if the Council decided to make the Committee in any way indirectly responsible for settling disputes as to the authorship beyond expecting that we should take all possible precautions that the proper names appear below the compositions in our collection.”
Mr. W. Snowdon said the aim of his late brother was to show the age of a peal. Would it be too much to trespass upon the time of the Peal Collection Committee to give the date, as far as possible, of the first performance, which would assist somewhat in arriving at the date of the composition. This, so far as he could see, need not take up much time, and would prove valuable to many members of the Exercise who took an interest in the date of a first performance. This was a point his brother was very keen upon. If it was no great additional trouble it would greatly assist in tracing the authorship, and from that point of view was of importance.
The Rev. H. Law James moved, and Mr. Watson seconded, that where possible the first performance be given.
The President said it must be distinctly understood that the Committee were not to be brought to book if the information given was not correct. That appeared to him the crux of the whole question. He had no doubt that the Committee would take every care in securing reliable information, but it might not be possible to obtain it. He was sure the Council was greatly indebted to the Committee for the work they had already done.
The resolution was adopted.
Mr. R. A. Daniell said the work of this Committee was still in hand, and progress was being made.
Canon Papillon asked what the work of the Committee was?
The Hon. Secretary said it had now resolved itself into the preparation of a short descriptive Catalogue of Books on Bells and Ringing.
Canon Papillon said matters of interest to the Exercise did sometimes appear in The Guardian, and it was encouraging to find the press taking an interest in church bells, which sometimes resulted in getting ringing matters of importance brought forward. There had been a work issued, “The Church Bells of Essex,” and not only The Guardian but two other papers had asked for copies. In one of the early editions of the Encyclopedia Britannica there was an article written by the late Mr. Haweis, which to some extent was a little misleading. In the new edition there would be an article in which the objectionable matter would have disappeared. This would make the work in regard to church bells a better authority than hitherto.
The President asked if the work in hand could be proceeded with, and be ready for the Council next year?
Mr. R. A. Daniell said he had the draft copy in hand, and should be able to get it round the other members of the Committee in time to be in the hands of the Hon. Secretary before next year’s Council meeting. Already a portion had been sent on to Mr. Dains, who he assumed still had it, but there were other members of the Committee for it to be sent to, and he did not think it would be desirable to publish the matter at present, but would promise it should reach the Hon. Secretary without undue delay.
The Rev. H. Law James reported that the Collection of Major Methods had been completed and forward to the next member of the Committee. It contained over 700 methods (laughter). Asked if these had all received names, he replied that it had been felt useless to attempt to name them.
Mr. A. T. King said that by a coincidence as happy as it was rare, the Analysis for the past year had already appeared (laughter). He did not think that any one who had not attempted to do the work, could form any idea of the trouble that was given by some of the Exercise. These person did not hesitate to send up to “The Bell News” belated peals, and the Committee hoped that the Council would agree with them that if peals were not published by the end of February, they should not be included in the Analysis. Again in some instances the same peal was sent by two persons, which no doubt was due to the desire to secure publication. It was only by chance that this was found out. Members of the Exercise should realise what an amount of trouble this carelessness caused. Much of the work had to be done over again as often such things upset what had been already done. By accident he found one error, and Mr. Griffin found two. Mr. Trollope had resigned from the Committee, as he was engaged upon other work for the Council, and it was impossible for him to give the necessary time. He (Mr. King), regretted this, for Mr. Trollope’s assistance upon the Committee had been most valuable, and Mr. Trollope was at all times ready to put one right. He did not know if there was any one desirous of joining this happy throng (laughter). It was the custom of them to work in pairs. He had himself worked with Mr. Griffin, and he had pleasure in telling the Council that there were less errors in the Analysis this year than there ever had been, which he believed was due to the clear and excellent handwriting of Mr. Griffin. This he had no doubt enabled the Editor of “The Bell News” to turn it out so correctly. With reference to filling in the vacancy caused by the resignation of Mr. Trollope, the Rev. E. W. Carpenter had expressed his willingness to assist, and he was sure the other members of the Committee would be pleased to be associated with the rev. gentleman in carrying out the work. He therefore proposed the election of the Rev. E. W. Carpenter as a member of the Analysis Committee in place of Mr. Trollope resigned.
Mr. J. Griffin seconded, and Mr. Trollope’s resignation having been accepted, the resolution was carried.
The Hon. Secretary produced a duplicate copy of the Analysis as published in “The Bell News,” and in doing so said he was sure the members of the Council would all admire the very excellent penmanship of Mr. Griffin, who must have taken an immense amount of time and trouble in its preparation.
The draft copy was exhibited in the room, and met with universal admiration.
Mr. J. Griffin said the copy before the Council was prepared for that meeting so that in the event of the Analysis not having appeared in “The Bell News” the Council could have seen the result for the last year, and the Committee thought that if the Analysis did appear previous to the meeting the engrossed copy would still be interesting to the Council.
The President said he was sure the Council would desire to express its appreciation to the members of the Committee on their very extensive and valuable work. To go thoroughly into the Analysis would be found to yield a vast amount of interesting information. He had himself taken a long railway journey with the analysis, but he had not exhausted it when he reached his journey’s end. He considered the Committee were perfectly justified in asking that peals should appear within a reasonable time, and would suggest a resolution bearing upon the matter be brought forward.
Mr. A. T. King moved, and Mr. J. Griffin seconded that the Council do not consider that the Peal Analysis Committee can be held responsible for any peals which do not appear in print before the end of February.
This was carried, and the President said he hoped those present would bring the matter under the notice of their Associations and endeavour to get them to conform thereto.
The Hon. Secretary said that during the year the Analysis Committee had referred the question of points to be allotted for Stedman Triples and Caters, and also Aston Major and Royal, and Cambridge Maximus, and the Committee had also asked for further consideration of the points to be given for peals of Minor. These the Peal Values Committee had considered, as it had also the general scheme submitted by himself at last year’s meeting; and the result was published in “The Bell News” for May 7th, together with the schedule.
Mr. G. Bolland said the table for Minor methods gave Plain, Treble Bob, and Surprise. He considered there should be four scales instead of three, and that a scale should be given for peals with “broken leads.” The Committee might have done their best, but they did not appear to understand the value of six-bell peals with broken leads. There should be a scale between those for Treble Bob and Surprise.
Mr. W. Snowdon said peals with broken leads came between those of Treble Bob and Surprise peals, for there were complications in such methods, and these ought therefore to be in some way recognised, but he saw a difficulty, for where are you going to stop? Those who rang peals with broken leads certainly found them more difficult than Treble Bob peals.
Mr. A. T. King said that after all one was only human (laughter), at least he found it so in the south (laughter). The difficulty he had was that few besides the Yorkshire ringers who rang them knew what peals with broken leads were. If those who rang such would indicate them, the Council could adopt a scale to which the Analysis Committee would of course work. The sliding scale as it appeared in “The Bell News” required some explanation. The suggestion he had made to the Points Committee was intended to remove the anomaly that they had a sliding scale for Plain Methods, but nothing for Treble Bob and Surprise methods. He thought that the scale should be read horizontally, and that ringers of Minor peals should be discouraged from ringing, say six Treble Bob or Surprise methods, and making up the seven by ringing a plain method instead of repeating a Treble Bob or a Surprise method. He thought that in such a case it would be well to degrade the peal to the level of a peal in Plain methods, or that, if a combined peal in Surprise or Treble Bob methods were rung, the whole should be reduced to a sliding scale in Treble Bob methods. Passing on to Doubles Mr. King said he felt that some encouragement should be given to those bands who had only five bells to ring upon. They were doubtless as keen as any ringers to be found; but being limited to Doubles, he thought that a scale might be formulated which gave to ringers in fourteen different methods, an advance upon the paltry two points which under existing conditions were all that the Analysis Committee could award. At the same time he thought that the question should be dealt with as to whether when six bells were available for Minor methods, the same privilege should be allowed. As regards the Schedule formulated by the Hon. Secretary, he thought the suggested classification, though open to criticism, was a step in the right direction, and was a very fair attempt at first sight to deal with a very vexed question. At the same time there were ominous omissions, and the Schedule would not be complete until a classification had been found for Yorkshire, Peterborough, Gloucester, Oxford, Westminster, Champion, Birmingham, Loughborough, and Shipway’s methods. If methods were provided for the proposed classification were again carefully revised, he felt that a great advance would have been made in dealing with a very difficult subject.
The Hon. Secretary said the “etcs.” in the schedule referred to the rest of the methods in the list on page 28 of Rules and Decisions, 1904.
Mr. A. T. King said some had been taken out. On the whole he thought the scheme was very well worked out, but it was desirable that the whole should be classified.
The President said both Mr. King and Mr. Bolland suggested improvement. He would suggest that if any alteration was to be made it should be done at once.
Mr. G. P. Burton said he did not think that justice had been done to twelve-bell peals in comparison with peals upon smaller numbers, especially on eight bells. The facilities for travelling and the number of rings of eight had of late years greatly increased but rings of twelve had not, that there was a far greater difficulty in getting together a twelve-bell band and keeping them together than there was with an eight-bell band; besides which eight-bell bands had greater advantages in going for higher methods than a twelve-bell band had. The risk of the loss of a twelve-bell peal was far greater than of an eight-bell peal. Under all the circumstances he thought something should be done to increase the points for twelve-bell peals.
Mr. W. Snowdon said one of the points which was not known was what is Surprise. They knew what was Treble Bob, and where broken leads came in, but there was yet a great deal which wanted thrashing out. Some said that Westminster was a Surprise. He said it was not. He did not think that the question of what was a Surprise peal would ever be settled at a full meeting. There was yet a great deal to learn where “Surprise” came in and where it did not.
Dr. Carpenter said he agreed that the points given for a twelve-bell peal were not sufficient. He considered that not only the difficulty of the method should be considered but the number of ringers also. He thought the report should certainly be referred back to the Committee for further consideration.
The Rev. H. L. James said he had protested against points several times, and did so still. If the Council would however keep to them, then the thing must go on. There were in his opinion some Treble Bob peals of Minor that were more difficult in ringing than some Surprise Minor. The fact that a peal was Surprise was not equivalent to its being difficult to ring. With respect to the question of points for twelve-bell peals, seven 720s of Cambridge Surprise Minor would take more ringing than a peal of Cambridge Maximus. The whole question of points was a wild chaos.
Mr. G. P. Burton said a twelve-bell peal was by far the most difficult, not only on the grounds he had previously stated, but there was also the extra length of time and the weight of metal, and the greater liability of a man making a mistake on the higher numbers, besides the extra number of men taking part.
Mr. W. A. Cave said he had experienced two failures on twelve bells in seven attempts, but he had lost far more of Stedman Triples, and he thought either a nine or twelve-bell peal was more easier than Triples.
Mr. C. H. Hattersley said he remembered having a conversation with the late Mr. Henry Johnson, who said there were a number of men in Birmingham who could ring a peal of Stedman Triples, but could not ring Cinques without making a mistake.
Mr. S. Wood said in ringing Stedman Triples a ringer had three others to look after, whereas in ringing a twelve-bell peal he had seven. To say Triples was more difficult than a twelve-bell peal was ridiculous in the extreme (laughter). If they considered a little before they spoke they would not make such statements (laughter).
The Rev. H. L. James said a twelve-bell peal was as simple as ringing call-changes (laughter).
The Hon. Secretary said what the Committee wanted was a clear and definite instruction from the Council.
Mr. R. A. Daniell said the question was one which would never have a satisfactory solution.
Mr. G. P. Burton said he thought the points allotted for eight and ten-bell peals might stand, but for twelve the number should be doubled or at least increased by half.
The President said Mr. Bolland had called attention to the question of points for peals with broken leads, Mr. Burton had advocated more points for twelve-bell peals, and Mr. Daniell had told the Council that perfection would never be attained. By going on from year to year and getting the views of different members the Council would get the nearest value attainable for a peal. Mr. James had again told the Council that he protested against points. It should be borne in mind that a great change had come about and there was no longer much ringing for money prizes, but Englishmen would have competition in some form, and this was the one way in which the Exercise could and did compete, and it was a healthy substitute for the ringing of church bells for money prizes. Let them look at the keenness there had been in the last twenty years in this matter and he was sure all would agree that there had been a vast improvement upon the old state of things. He was sure the Council would desire to thank the Committee for their labours, and he had no doubt that the various points that had been raised would be carefully considered by the Committee.
The Bell News and Ringers’ Record June 11, 1910, pages 219 to 221
The following item was the next upon the agenda.
“To call attention to the scientific extension of Stedman from the original six-score, and to move that (i) Stedman with slow sixes as plain sixes, quick sixes for bobs, and 1st, 2nd, and 3rds place in the middle of a quick or slow six for a single be called Stedman in the Original variation; (ii) that Stedman with slow sixes only, and the bob and single on the last three bells be called Stedman in the Erin variation; (iii) that Stedman with alternate quick and slow sixes, and the bobs and singles on the last three bells be called Stedman in the Norwich variation; (iv) that Stedman Caters and Cinques with alternate quick and slow sixes, 3th place bobs, and 5th, 6th, and 7th at a single be called Stedman in the Painswick variation; (v) that Stedman with slow sixes for Plain in front and behind, double dodging in the middle where necessary, and quick sixes for bobs, and the first three or last three places in the middle of a quick or slow six for singles be called Double Stedman.”
The Rev. H. Law James, who was called upon by the President, said he desired to make a small correction in the first section. He wanted the word “places” inserted in the second line of the resolution, so as to read 1st, 2nd and 3rd places, and after the word six in the following line to insert “for singles.” So corrected the first resolution would read “Stedman with slow sixes as plain sixes, quick sixes for bobs and 1st, 2nd or 3rd places in the middle of a quick or slow six for singles be called Stedman in the Original Variation.” Having before gone thoroughly into the whole question, he did not consider it necessary to go far into the question now. It had been already pointed out that Stedman produced a six-score which consisted of sixty changes, and with two singles the whole 120 changes were obtained. To extend Stedman to Triples, Caters, or Cinques they must go to the Original six-score. Stedman thus rung has the essence of music, which is never changed by either a bob or single. Having gone into the matter from a scientific and historical point, the rev. gentleman said he wanted for each extension of Stedman what he considered its proper title just as is done with Treble Bob, which appeared as either in the Kent or Oxford Variation as the case might be. At present he should only move the first section of the five resolutions which had been placed on the agenda. He had not much to say if the Council struck out “Norwich Variation,” and did not think it would be desirable to proceed with the other sections of the resolution unless this first one was adopted. At present he was only asking that “In the original Variation” be placed against peals rung in accordance with the first section.
The Hon. Secretary formally seconded, in order to open discussion.
Canon Papillon said he should like to know from those who rang Stedman if it was desirable to introduce such compilations. He had not sufficient knowledge himself, and was therefore desirous of learning if this procedure was necessary.
The Hon. Secretary said he had seen the correspondence which had passed between Mr. Trollope and the Rev. H. Law James. The Council could form some idea of the bulk, when he mentioned that it filled eight or ten copy books (laughter). Mr. Trollope wrote: “You know that I have gone pretty freely into the Stedman question. I think the method as we ring it is entitled to the name without any qualification, and it alone. Apart from any other reasons its historical position would justify this, but it is also proved I think to be a perfectly regular and legitimate extension of the 6-score. Mr. James’s plan i.e. slow six for method and quick six for bob is perfectly probable, and is also a development of the original 6-score, but since there is no evidence that Stedman or any one else looked at the method in this way, I do not consider that it can be called original Stedman. I should not object to its being called a variation of Stedman, say Cambridge variation. Fifths place bobs in Caters and Cinques are totally irregular, and I hope the Connell will not sanction them. The quick six, which has without any doubt the effect of a bob, is not at present strictly a regular bob, but the Council might make it regular.”
The Hon. Sec. said that he agreed with Mr. Trollope. It was possible that the fact that the half six-score in Grandsire was produced by alternate plain and bob leads suggested to Stedman the alternate use of two different manners or ways of producing the rows, which in his hands took the form of slow and quick sixes, but this there was absolutely no evidence to show, and no ground whatever for supposing that he did not regard the alternation of slow and quick as of the essence of the method, in fact as of itself constituting the method. We all know that Stedman made the single on the bells in 2-3, but probably he himself would have been the first to acknowledge that the present plan was an improvement on his own. Unless we are to change the meaning of the English language, Stedman Triples, Caters, and Cinques in the form hitherto universally adopted are the natural and regular development of Stedman Doubles. Others may be possible, but are at the best more or less fanciful.
Mr. S. Wood said the proposal was one which might be very well for Mr. James, who was so well versed in mathematics, but to the ordinary layman it was not. He said: “I move that Stedman be the same as it was in my father’s day (much laughter).”
Mr. W. T. Cockerill seconded.
The Rev. H. S. T. Richardson complained of the strongly-marked disposition to reject Mr. James’s theory without investigation, simply through objection to its novelty. Stedman as hitherto rung fell, as experts insist, into divisions twelve changes long, which began and ended in the middle of a six; and in fact no other divisions were legitimate. But then all the bobs have to be called in the interior of the divisions. And in each division there were two bobbing-places (quite unconnected with each other), which were contrary to all rule and custom. But if the quick six were treated as a bob, then the sixes (slow) became the proper and recognised divisions of Stedman, just as they always were in practical ringing; and the difficulty vanished. The real question was this. Is the quick six a bob? It could not be denied that it was a bob in effect. It altered the coursing-order of the bells precisely as the familiar bob behind did; changing a b c to c a b. In a quick six three bells were doing quick work; and this left two of them just where they were at the preceding six-end, and ready to take up their normal (slow) work where they left it off. This was exactly parallel to a bob-lead in Plain Bob. It only remains to recognise the quick six as a bob. We were not concerned now with the consequences of that recognition.
The Rev. W. W. C. Baker said he hoped the Council would carefully consider the points raised by the last speaker. This was not a question of what was done in their father’s time, or their grandfather’s time. The Council should legislate for the average ringer of the present day, but not for those who had fads.
The Rev. H. S. T. Richardson said it was not the desire of Mr. James or himself to upset things, but the matter was one of fact, and should be considered upon its merits. The Council should see that new light had been brought forward, and should consider this before saying that it had no advantage.
The Rev. H. Law James said if other people were going to go on ringing Stedman as they did now, he should do the same, but it was not scientific.
The President said he had always held that Stedman ran in 12’s, and from this came beauty of its music, and why it was desired to make any change he did not know. Mr. James told them that the present method was not the correct one, but it had always gone under the title of Stedman, and would continue to do so. He appreciated Mr. James’s scientific discoveries, but not his wish to change the accepted title of the method.
Fifteen voted for Mr. Woods’ amendment, and ten against. It was then put as the substantive motion, and carried.
The Rev. H. Law James said that under these circumstances he did not propose to proceed with the other sections of his resolutions.
Mr. W. S. Story moved that the representation of each Association on the Council be proportionate to the number of resident ringing members only. In moving the resolution Mr. Story said he claimed that each Association or Guild should have a fair representation according to the resident ringing members. There were a number of Associations which had a considerable proportion of hon. members at present. These helped to swell the representation of those Associations upon the Council. In a word he claimed there should be one man one vote, which would be only equitable. He was aware that it would reduce the representation of some Associations. Of others it would not; but there would be nothing but what was fair and just to all.
Mr. W. A. Cave seconded.
The Hon. Secretary moved to leave out the word “ringing” so as to include also honorary resident ringing members. If this was adopted, he said, it would be on similar lines to the Gloucester and Bristol Diocesan Association. He thought it would be a pity to debar hon. members who might be present at the annual meeting or otherwise of an Association when the election of representatives to the Council took place from voting and also from representation upon the Council. Many hon. members did a great deal in supporting the Associations, and ought therefore to have a voice in such a matter. He was in favour of the spirit of the resolution with this exception. As to non-resident members he was himself a member of several Associations, but he should regard it as unfair on his part to vote for members of Council in any election except that of the particular county from which the Association within whose boundaries he was really resident.
Canon Papillon said the Essex Association had about 100 non-resident members, and from seventy to eighty resident hon. members who subscribed and took a local interest in ringing and in the Association. He seconded the amendment.
Mr. R. A. Daniell called attention to the position of the College Youths and Cumberland Youths, and asked whether if this amendment was adopted, London was to be considered as a place of residence for members of these Societies.
Mr. A. T. King said the term resident meant where a man slept. There were very many of the London ringers who worked in London, but slept in the country. If the resolution was adopted, it would disfranchise large numbers.
The Rev. H. J. Elsee thought that resident members would cover the question.
The President pointed out that the motion would reduce the number of members now returned to the Council.
The Rev. H. Law James said he thought the question had better be left where it was. The Council could do very well with the 2s. 6d. that is paid for each member.
Mr. S. Wood said there appeared to be some misunderstanding. In the Lancashire Association only resident ringers were counted for representation.
The President put the amendment, for which 17 voted and 7 against.
Mr. E. H. Lewis moved as a further amendment, that the motion should apply to territorial associations only.
The President asked how the term territorial was to be defined.
Mr. E. H. Lewis explained that the boundaries of a county would be taken as a territorial area.
The Rev. H. S. T. Richardson called attention to the Cambridge University Guild, and suggested that the proposal should not include either this society, or the College Youths, or Cumberlands. He seconded the amendment, which was carried.
The President said he failed to see how it would work. One thing it would do, would be to reduce the number attending the Council as representatives, which he thought would be a pity. Mr. Wood had carried his point in respect to Stedman, which was still to be rung as his father rang it, and he thought that in the present matter it would be wiser to go on as they had satisfactorily done for the last 20 years.
The motion as amended, was then put to the meeting, and lost.
“That in order to sustain an authorship claim the figures of all new compositions should be sent to the Secretary of the Peal Committee, and that their publication in local reports, or even in “The Bell News,” will not be considered a bona fide claim, unless the above condition be fulfilled. If the figures were not for publication, a letter to this effect must be attached.”
The above resolution was submitted by Mr. J. H. Banks, who said hitherto there had not been any system as to authorship. A man in the north of England might produce a peal, and some one in the south would produce the same, and there was a struggle between them as to which was the right author. By the adoption of the resolution be considered this might to a large extent be avoided in the future. If the scheme was adopted, the author could be told whether a composition was new or not. He would suggest that an appeal should be made through “The Bell News” to all composers to assist in the matter by sending in new compositions, which no doubt would save a great deal of trouble.
The resolution having been seconded,
The Rev. H. S. T. Richardson said much of the discussion in “The Bell News” upon the claims of authorship was not at all edifying. Fifty per cent of the compositions that appeared were said to be false. He was afraid however there would be a lot of work for some one if the motion was carried.
Dr. Carpenter asked what Committee it was suggested should take the matter in hand.
Mr. J. H. Banks suggested the Analysis Committee.
Mr. C. H. Hattersley said the work would not only be considerable, but great care would have to be exercised to discriminate between variations and original compositions. He did not think there would be anyone found prepared to take so great a work in hand.
The Rev. C. W. O. Jenkyn asked if the Secretary of the Peal Collection Committee could not undertake and insert in “The Bell News” the compositions sent in.
The Hon. Secretary said some peals which had been sent in for the Collection had proved to be false. He would quote what Mr. Trollope, writing on this, said:- “If the resolution making it necessary for a composer to send his peal to us is carried, I do not think this would really do any good. If a man is first he is first, and if he can prove it by any means his claim must stand, whether he has complied with any arbitrary rule or not. We are always willing to give any information, and do give it, as to peals in our hands; but to make it possible that anyone should apply to us for information as a right would be, I think, asking too much. One has after all a limited time to devote to these things, and we should not be put in such a position that a man may expect as a right to have letters on authorship of peals, besides neither in this nor in the Methods Committee do I think we have any judicial function.”
The Rev. C. W. O. Jenkyn said if the idea was adopted there would be a date put upon each composition as it came to hand, and in the event of another composer simultaneously sending in the same peal, it would be known which was actually composed first.
Mr. J. Griffin asked if it was suggested that the Secretary of the Peal Committee should prove such peals.
Mr. J. H. Banks replied in the negative.
Mr. W. Snowdon said the question was one which he considered might be left to the Associations. If they put the work upon a Committee it would be too much. Let the Associations look after the matter as some of them were doing.
Mr. J. H. Banks said he had no desire to cast the slightest reflection upon any Association Reports, neither did he desire to put any strain upon any Secretary of a Committee. He had brought the matter up because he saw the necessity for something of the kind he had suggested.
The President said the Council had never taken upon itself any judicial work of this kind, and he did not think it at all desirable that they should do so now. Mr. Trollope was certainly correct in his view that whatever regulations might be made, adequate evidence of priority could not be overruled.
The resolution was lost.
The President said the Standing Committee had considered the place for next year’s meeting. Working upon the usual method, it was suggested that the meeting should be either at Leicester or Nottingham.
The Rev. G. F. Coleridge proposed, and Mr. Griffin seconded, that the meeting be held at Leicester.
An amendment was moved for the meeting to be held at Brighton. It was pointed out the Council had already held a meeting at Brighton. The amendment was lost. As between Nottingham and Leicester, the President said that while for several reasons he personally should prefer the former, yet he felt that the energy displayed by Leicester for a considerable number of years, entitled them to preference.
The resolution fixing Leicester as the next place of meeting was carried.
VOTES OF THANKS.
The Rev. G. F. Coleridge in moving a vote of thanks to the President, said hitherto this had been done by their old friend Mr. Robinson, but now he was no longer with them, it was a duty he desired to discharge. The able manner in which Sir Arthur had presided over the meeting, needed no words from him to secure the hearty approval of the resolution which he had the pleasure and the privilege of moving.
Mr. W. T. Cockerill seconded.
The resolution having been carried with hearty applause, the President thanked the Council.
The Hon. Secretary moved a vote of thanks to the Rev. H. J. Elsee who had so greatly assisted in making the necessary arrangements for the meeting with such success; to the Feoffees of Chetham’s hospital for the use of the historical buildings, and to the Lancashire Association for the kind invitation to tea.
The vote was seconded by the Rev. Canon Papillon, and carried with acclamation.
The Rev. J. Elsee, in replying, gave a short but interesting history of the ancient buildings, in which they were met, when after the tea the Governor would be pleased to shew to any who wished to see round the buildings without the usual payment, leaving any who wished to subscribe to the ancient school to do so.
The company adjourned to the Old Schoolroom, where a substantial tea was provided and the wants of all most diligently attended to. A tour round the buildings followed, and thus was brought to a close one of the most pleasant gatherings it has been the privilege of the writer of these reports for the last seventeen years to attend.
Subsequently there was muffled ringing at the Cathedral, the Town Hall, and elsewhere; but the usual evening social gathering, as already stated, was, as a mark of respect to His late Majesty King Edward, dispensed with.
The Bell News and Ringers’ Record June 18, 1910, pages 231 to 233