Peals Analysis Committee.

INTERESTING STATISTICS.

The following report of the Peals Analysis Committee for the year ended 31st December, 1910, is to be presented:

We, the undersigned, being members of the Peals Analysis Committee appointed in 1908, desire to present to the Council the result of our labours for 1910.

We desire at the outset once more to call attention to the want of care on the part of senders of peals for publication. No fewer than eight peals have been repeated in the columns of the Bell News in 1910, as compared with two in 1909. One of these, at least, is a corrected peal, and ought not, in our opinion, to have been sent without a reference to the previous publication.

We have also noticed several peals in Minor methods which are really peals of Treble Bob Minor, and yet are not so stated. We have given the enhanced value of these in our analysis on the present occasion; but, in future, after having called attention to the matter, we shall make no endeavour to rectify the omissions of those who are responsible for sending their peals for publication. We take this opportunity of asking that any peals rung with “Broken Leads” may be earmarked by those who communicate them, as your committee are bound to confess that they are not sufficiently familiar with such methods to be able to appraise them at their proper value.

We note that, in two cases, six methods only are enumerated out of seven methods rung, and we have looked in vain for the omissions to be rectified. We have ourselves investigated several cases of incomplete entries, and in some of them we are informed that the fault does not rest with the senders of the peals.

It may not be uninteresting to give a sample of the difficulties with which we have to contend. On page 173 (Vol. xxix.) the Rev. T. Buswell is stated to have rung his first peal on the treble, and to be 15 years of age! Again, on page 620, a peal at Lyminster, Sussex, is said to have been conducted by C. Golding; while the ringer of the 5th is said to be C. Goldsing, and we shrewdly suspect that the name, after all, should be Goldring. Once more, as an example of a slovenly report, on page 441, there is a note “First peal as conductor,” in spite of the same person having conducted a peal of Kent Treble Bob Major in the same tower on the 20th June. See page 295. It is clear that the words “in the method” have been omitted. A great deal more might be said about similar inaccuracies, but the above sample will suffice to serve our purpose in calling attention to them, which is to inform people who are at fault to be a little more careful.

We pass on to a few matters of interest, which have been revealed by a somewhat closer scrutiny of the pages of Bell News then we have usually given. The number of first peals total to 629, of which 121 were on a covering bell. The first peals away from the tenor are 17 in number. These figures are only approximate, as some peals are published with a “star” or “dagger” against a footnote without any corresponding mark against any of the ringers. A case in point is that of Hornchurch on page 596.

Those who rang their first peals as conductors in 1910 were 80 in number; in other words, the old conductors on the active list for 1910 were recruited to the extent of some 16 per cent. by new comers.

The first peal on the bells (new or added) was rung in 71 cases; on restored bells, in 11 cases, and by an entirely local band, in 22 cases. These figures are not, however, readily ascertained; because in some cases the words “first on the bells” are clearly taken to mean “the first in the method on the bells.”

The number of birthday peals rung was 134; of wedding peals 50 (including one “diamond” and five “golden” weddings); of muffled peals 55. These last include three for the old year, but exclude those rung on the death of his late Majesty, King Edward VII., and on the death of the late Rev. F. E. Robinson, which are enumerated in our general scheme of analysis. The peals of “welcome” and “farewell” are 24 in number; peals rung on public occasions 59; and “quarterly peals” five.

The ages of ringers are not uninteresting. On the younger side we find two of 12, five of 13, two of 14, two of 15, and a young lady of 16. At the older end we find persons aged 70, 71, 74, 75 and 83 still on the active list, and ringing peals.

Peal Values’ Committee.

PROPOSED REVISED SCALE OF POINTS.

The Peal Values’ Committee report states: Your committee, having been instructed, at the meeting at Manchester last year, to take the question of a general scheme for allotting points to peals into their further consideration, beg leave to report as follows:- They have given very careful attention to the whole subject, and have endeavoured to embody in the schedule, which they now propose for your adoption, the chief features that were recommended in the discussion that was held at the meeting, principal among them being the allotment of comparatively more points to peals on the higher numbers of bells. The chief difficulty that has confronted them has been that of securing this feature without the employment of any complicated formulæ in the calculation of the points, their only regret being that the formula which they have felt compelled to adopt - the simplest that would meet the case - is more complicated than they really like.

SCHEDULES.

A.- For peals on seven bells and upwards:-

The foregoing schedule is calculated by the formula VN ² ÷ 64, i.e., multiply the number found in the column headed “Value” by the number of bells, and the product by the number of bells once more, and divide the last product by 64.

B.- For peals on six bells:-

Thus a peal consisting of two 720’s in Treble Bob Methods, two in “broken lead” methods, and three in Surprise Methods would count 6 + 8 + 14 = 28.

For 42 six scores of Doubles your committee recommend three points.

Notice has been received to the effect that the following schedule will be proposed as an amendment to schedule A given above:-

The Ringing World, May 26th, 1911, pages 159 to 160

THE CENTRAL COUNCIL.

TUESDAY’S MEETING AT LEICESTER.

A SUMMARY OF THE PROCEEDINGS.

By “The Ringing World” Special Representative.

The Central Council of Church Bell Ringers met at Leicester on Tuesday. The gathering might almost be termed a coming of age celebration, for, being the third session of the seventh Council, the assembly was the 21st annual meeting. During the week-end and on Whit-Monday the representatives began to reach the district from various parts of the country, and many had the opportunity of ringing in fresh towers, while some of the more enthusiastic had peal programmes to get through. Those who took advantage of the occasion to make a more extended visit than the one day devoted to the meeting were favoured with magnificent weather, the only disadvantage being that it was, if anything, too warm for long spells in the belfries.

The meeting took place at the Old Town Hall, one of the most interesting and historic buildings in the ancient town of Leicester. The Old Guildhall, in which the Central Council transacted their business, has witnessed many a stirring scene, strikingly in contrast with the decorous assembly of the gentlemen, who, on Tuesday, discussed the merits of legitimate methods, peal values and such like problems undreamt of by former generations.

Before eleven o’clock, the time for which the meeting was summoned, ringers began to reach their temporary “Parliament House.” The Standing Committee had already met, and the time until the president (Sir Arthur Heywood) took the chair was filled by that happy occupation of greeting old friends, and making new acquaintances. It was a pleasant quarter of an hour before the serious business of the day commenced.

THE ATTENDANCE.

Sir Arthur Heywood, Bart., presided over an attendance that was larger than usual, and the Associations represented were:-

Ancient Society of College Youths: F. Dench.
Bedfordshire: Rev. W. W. C. Baker.
Birmingham Diocesan: W. H. Godden.
Cambridge University: E. H. Lewis.
Chester Diocesan: Rev. A. T. Beeston and Joseph Norbury.
Devonshire: Rev. M. Kelly and A. W. Searle.
Durham and Newcastle: W. Story.
Ely Diocesan: Rev. J. M. Clarkson.
Essex: W. J. Nevard.
Gloucester and Bristol: Rev. H. A. Cockey, J. Austin and W. A. Cave.
Hereford Diocesan: J. Clark.
Hertfordshire: B. Prewett.
Kent County: Rev. F. J. O. Helmore and E. Barnett.
Lancashire: Rev. H. J. Elsee and H. Chapman.
Leeds and District: J. Broadley.
Lincoln Diocesan: Rev. H. Law James, G. Chester, R. Richardson, J. W. Seamer.
Llandaff Diocesan: J. W. Jones.
Middlesex: A. T. King.
Midland Counties: J. Griffin, J. W. Taylor, W. E. White
Northants (Central): F. Wilford.
Norwich: G. P. Burton.
Oxford Diocesan: Rev. G. F. Coleridge, Rev. C. W. O. Jenkyn, W. P. Routh.
Stafford Archideaconal: S. Reeves.
Surrey: Dr. A. B. Carpenter and Mr. C. Dean.
Sussex County: F. B. Tompkins, R. J. Dawe, G. H. Howse, G. Watson.
Warwickshire: A. L. Coleman.
Winchester Diocesan: Rev. C. E. Matthews, H. White.
Worcestershire: T. J. Salter, J. R. Newman.
Yorkshire: G. Bolland, C. H. Hattersley and W. Snowdon.
Hon Members: Rev. E. W. Carpenter, Rev. H. S. T. Richardson, Rev. A. F. H. Boughey, J. Carter. J. W. Parker, J. S. Pritchett, J. A. Trollope, G. Williams, and the Rev. C. D. P. Davies, hon. sec.

The Royal Cumberland Youths, the Bath and Wells Diocesan, the Cleveland and North Yorkshire, the Irish, the Liverpool Diocesan, the London County, the North Notts, the North Wales, the Salisbury, the Salop Archidiaconal and the Truro Diocesan Associations were unrepresented. There were 51 representative members present and 45 absent, and nine honorary members present and four absent.

The Rev. C. W. O. Jenkyn reported that up to the present only £185 out of the £300 required to erect the proposed memorial screen to the late Rev. F. E. Robinson had been subscribed, and moved: “That in the event of the required amount of £300 not being in the hands of the Robinson Memorial Committee by the end of August, 1911, the Council sees no objection to the committee reconsidering the form the memorial shall take.”- Carried.

A resolution expressing regret at the loss the Exercise has sustained by the death of Mr. R. S. Story, of Newcastle, was carried, the members rising in their places.

The Council’s accounts, which were adopted, showed that the balance in hand had increased from £52 18s. 1d. to £67 4s. 1d.

The Rev. E. W. Carpenter was re-elected, and Mr. H. W. Wilde was elected an hon. member.

The Rev. H. S. T. Richardson, for the Peal Collection Committee, reported that progress was being made with the next section of the report.

The Church Press Committee (appointed in 1903), in the absence of Mr. R. A. Daniell, had nothing to report.

The Legitimate Methods Committee’s report was made by the Rev. H. Law James; and a long discussion took place on the report of the Peal Values Committee (already published in The Ringing World). Eventually the schedule, which it had been announced would be moved as an amendment, was accepted by the Council, and referred to the committee for their consideration, by 25 votes to 12. The schedule for Minor Methods was referred back for consideration with certain modifications.

The Peals Analysis Committee’s report (published in our issue of a fortnight ago) was adopted.

The Rev. H. Law James moved:

• That nothing shall be recognised as a Peal of Minor, unless it consists of at least seven true and complete seven hundred and twenties; but that the 5040 may be extended by the addition of one touch of less than 720 changes, with or without extra 720’s.

On the motion of Mr. J. W. Parker, an amendment was agreed to altering the first part of the motion to read “that the Council recommend that peals of Minor shall consist of at least seven true and complete 720’s,” etc.

It was proposed by Mr. W. Story, seconded by Mr. W. Cave:

• That for the purpose of representation on the Central Council only such members of any Territorial Association as are resident within the area covered by that Association shall be considered in fixing the number of representatives which such Association is entitled to elect.

The motion was defeated.

In the absence of Mr. J. Parker (Royal Cumberland Youths), Mr. Trollope moved, and Mr. Dawe seconded:

• That the Central Council give to the “Ringing World” recognition equal to that accorded to the “Bell News” for the publication of official reports and communications, and that any peals published exclusively in the “Ringing World” shall be counted in the Central Council’s analysis.

After a lengthy discussion, in the course of which opposition was actively led by the President, the “previous question” was carried by about 12 votes to six, in the meeting of 60 representatives, and the matter was therefore shelved.

A vote of thanks to the President concluded the business.

In the evening there was a social gathering at the Grand Hotel.

The Ringing World, June 9th, 1911, page 187

CENTRAL COUNCIL AND “THE RINGING WORLD.”

President’s Strange Attitude.

MOTION FOR RECOGNITION SHELVED.

Notice had been given by Mr. J. Parker, of the Royal Cumberland Youths to move at the Central Council Meeting at Leicester on Whit-Tuesday: “That the Central Council give to ‘The Ringing World’ recognition equal to that accorded to the ‘Bell News’ for the publication of official reports and communications, and that any peals published exclusively in ‘The Ringing World’ shall be counted in the Central Council’s analysis.” Mr. Parker was unable to attend the meeting, as was also Mr. F. Bennett, to whom the charge of the motion had been handed over, and the moving of the resolution was, therefore, undertaken by Mr. J. A. Trollope.

Mr. Trollope in proposing the motion, said he wanted to say first that the resolution was not directed against the “Bell News.” He had no public opinion at all on the subject as between the two papers. He strongly felt that the Council, as a Council, should hold the scales evenly as between the two rival papers. It was interesting to look back upon the extraordinary increase and improvement in ringing, not only in peal ringing, but also in organisation and everything which they called belfry reform. He supposed the Associations were responsible in the first place, and that Council, too, as the head of the Associations, but unless they had got a paper, the Associations were crippled, and the Council was, practically speaking, “done.” It was no good passing resolutions until they could get into touch with the ringers, therefore a good paper was a necessity. Mr. King had had something to say about the Analysis Committee. He (Mr. Trollope) had nothing to say on that subject, but they should remember that the Council existed by the support and for the benefit of every ringer. They did not meet once a year in order that they should have a pleasant holiday, although, he supposed, no one underrated their opportunity in that respect, but they met for the sake and for the good of ringers generally. Now, if they were to do that they must get into contact with and bring their decisions to every ringer, for every ringer had a right to the resolutions of the Council. If the Council confined themselves to one paper they were practically saying that a man must take one paper, or, if he preferred to take the other, then, although he paid his share toward the Council, he was not to get the advantage. It was simply because they as a Council ought to take every step possible to bring all their rules and decisions for the good of ringers to the ringers as much as they could, that he moved the resolution.

Mr. R. J. Dawe seconded the motion, and endorsed what Mr. Trollope had said. The various Associations and Guilds throughout the country, he added, had recognised “The Ringing World,” and he thought the Council ought to do so.

Mr. G. P. Burton asked what was meant by the expression “official recognition.” Was it proposed that they should have two official gazettes, and was the “Bell News” official?

The President (Sir A. P. Heywood) said the “Bell News” had been the only means they had had hitherto of making their reports and decisions known.

THE QUESTION OF THE ANALYSIS.

The Rev. E. W. Carpenter moved the omission of all the words in the resolution after “communication,” because of the additional labour which would be cast upon the Peals Analysis Committee. During the time the two papers had been in circulation together there had been 41 peals published in one not published in the other, and 30 published in the other and not published in the one. That sort of thing would give an immense amount of work to the Analysis Committee, and if the Council required them to analyse the reports in both papers, they would have seriously to consider their position. He thought the least that conductors could do was to send the account of the same peal to the two papers, and it ought to be left to the same person to do it. Even now, how were the committee to get to work with 41 peals in one paper and not in the other, and 30 in the other and not in the one?

Mr. J. Griffin, who seconded the amendment, said he would very seriously have to consider his position on the Analysis Committee, if the Council passed the original motion. If they left it until next year they might find a committee willing to undertake the work of analysis in both papers.

Replying to a question as to whether the report of the meeting would be supplied to “The Ringing World,” the President replied that that would be out of the question. It would mean an immense amount of labour to correct the proofs and copy it out a second time, and it could not really be done

Mr. Burton said that any rule that conductors should send to one paper or the other could not be enforced. Conductors were most uncertain people.

Mr. A. T. King said there was more in the resolution than met the eye, and unless they could all work together and work for the common good, they would get into a dreadful muddle. If they got one person saying, “I prefer this paper,” and another one, “I am determined to have that,” it would make an end to the analysis and everything else. He did not like the words “official reports and communications,” and he thought if people thought their peals worth recording they might take the trouble to send them to each paper. If they got people making a stand for this or that paper it went at the foundation of everything, and there would be no analysis. Let them do their best to support both papers and give them all the information they could, and write articles for both and not play up one against the other, otherwise they would be much worse off than they had ever been.

AN INSINUATION DENIED.

Mr. Trollope said that having been a member of the Analysis Committee for a year or two, he was not likely to underrate the difficulties they had to contend with, but if they were going to have an analysis, which was an analysis of only half the peals, what was the use of it? They might as well have no analysis at all. As to the suggestion that there was something behind the resolution, so far as he personally was concerned, there was nothing behind it more than was on the face of it.

Mr. J. Griffin: Well, we know there is.

Mr. Trollope: When I take a resolution over and move it, I do not think you ought to read anything else into it.

Mr. G. Watson said in the part of the country he came from the new paper had made extremely good headway. There were five or six “Ringing Worlds” sold to one “Bell News.” He did not think they ought to read into the resolution anything that was not there, and as far as they, as a Central Council, were concerned, they ought to give the same recognition to both.

A member said in Macclesfield there were ten who were taking “The Ringing World” and only three who took the old paper, but the seven did not see the analysis, because it was only published in one paper.

The Rev. C. E. Matthews said it was not merely the representatives who had to be considered. Ringing members outside had the right to be considered and those who wanted to see their own names in touches and peals would get the best paper. He held no brief for either, but the majority of men would take the most popular paper.

The amendment on being put, was carried, and the Rev. J. M. Clarkson who did not like the term “official recognition,” moved, “that the Central Council send their official reports and communications for publication both to ‘The Ringing World’ and to ‘Bell News,’”- Mr. Bolland seconded.

THE PRESIDENT’S ATTITUDE.

In the course of a somewhat heated speech, the President said he agreed that they could not say that ringers should not take in this or that paper, but he was quite sure one of the two would go bankrupt within twelve months, and until one of them went bankrupt the analysis would have to fall through, for it made it impossible that, without superhuman labour, their analysis, which was so interesting, should be carried on. “The very moment,” continued the President, “that I saw certain peals published in the new paper and not in ‘Bell News’ I knew the analysis would be wrecked. The fact of the matter is I wish that paper had never been started. I tell you frankly I don’t care one atom whether the official communications are sent or not, and whether the report of this meeting goes in or not. I am not going to do that work twice over. I have done it for 21 years, and it takes a tremendous amount of time.”

Mr. T. J. Salter: I don’t think we ought to have an Analysis Committee.

The President: You won’t have.

Mr. Salter: I think the people responsible for the paper should see to that. I have thought so for years.

The Rev. C. W. O. Jenkyn asked if the members of the Analysis Committee liked to have peals sent to them direct. He asked that question because there had been two peals which he knew of, and which had been sent to “Bell News,” but had not appeared.

Mr. Griffin said the committee could not consider them unless they had been published.

The Rev. H. J. Elsee asked whether it would not be possible to send a copy of the final minutes of the Council and the notices to both papers, if both were existing when the next Council met.

The Hon. Secretary said when he received notice of the resolution, he wrote and told the proposer that, so far as he (Mr. Davies) was concerned it was not necessary because “The Ringing World” already was being treated exactly in the same way as “Bell News.” He sent every notice to “The Ringing World,” except the analysis, which related to peals published before the paper came into existence.

The President said he did not see why they should give equal facilities to a new paper as to one who had been there so long.

Mr. Trollope said unless they gave them equal treatment they were setting themselves against that class of men who preferred the new paper to the old. He did not see why they should confine themselves to the “Bell News.” It was not a question of rivalry between the two papers, it was a question of how the Council could best get into touch with ringers. How could they say that the Council was fulfilling its function of bringing ringers under one body if they were going to penalise the man who took “The Ringing World?” They would be doing a lot of harm.

The amendment on being put was carried, and the President declared: I tell you frankly, if you wish to carry it out I refuse to do it.

Mr. J. S. Pritchett said he would move “the previous question.”

The President: I am glad to hear it.

Mr. Pritchett said he moved it partly in obedience to the view the President had expressed as to the difficulty of carrying the motion into effect, and partly that he thought the amendment just carried merely meant that of the two the Council would prefer the amendment to the original. It did not follow that the Council disapproved of both, but he moved “the previous question” to get rid of the difficulty.

The President said he did not want to be misunderstood. He was a very busy man, and was anxious to carry on the work of the Council. If they carried the resolution and forced upon him such an amount of labour, which took days and days to do, he should have to give it up.

“The previous question” was then put, and carried by about 12 votes to six, the rest of the members present not voting.- The matter was, therefore, shelved.

The Ringing World, June 16th, 1911, page 203

THE CENTRAL COUNCIL.

FULL REPORT OF THE LEICESTER MEETING.

By “The Ringing World” Special Representative.

Following the summary of the Central Council’s proceedings at Leicester, which we gave last week, we begin in this issue the full report of the meeting. From the list of attendances given on page 187, the names of the Surrey Association representatives (Dr. A. B. Carpenter and Mr. C. Dean) were inadvertently omitted.

THE ROBINSON MEMORIAL FUND.

After the minutes had been read, the Rev. C. W. O. Jenkyn referred to the position of the Robinson Memorial Fund. They had, he said, a matter of £185 in hand out of £300 required to carry out the scheme of putting a screen in Drayton Church, a screen, the design of which was accepted by the late Rev. F. E. Robinson, and which he had intended to execute with his own hands. Of the amount subscribed, the Oxford Diocesan Guild had contributed about one-half and the other half had come from the other Associations, but not nearly so many had sent contributions as had been hoped. The committee would be very glad to know as soon as possible what further amounts they were likely to receive, because they felt it was not right to go on through another year without taking some steps to put up the memorial. If all the Societies had done as certain others had done, the committee would have had the money long ago. If they could not look forward to securing the remainder of the £300 within, at least, the next two or three months, he thought the only thing was that the committee should reconsider the scheme altogether, and he would like an expression of the Council’s opinion as to what course should be followed.

The Hon. Secretary read a letter from Mrs. Robinson, thanking the Council for the vote of sympathy sent to her from the previous Council meeting, and adding her appreciation of the kindness and generosity of all those who so readily responded to the idea of the memorial, which she was glad had been opened to all ringers.

Replying to the Rev. H. J. Elsee, the Rev. C. W. O. Jenkyn said he thought it would be invidious to state what the individual Societies had contributed, but the highest sum received from any Society was £15, and the lowest 12s. He thought the committee must take it that, if they did not hear anything further within the next two months, they had received all they would receive, and that they must then reconsider the scheme. He supposed those who had already contributed would not object to their money going to some other means of perpetuating the memorial to Mr. Robinson - such as a stained glass window, or something which the committee, with the Vicar of the Parish, might agree upon.

Eventually Mr. Jenkyn moved that in the event of the required amount of £300 not being in the hands of the Robinson Memorial Committee by the end of August, 1911, the Council see no objection to the committee reconsidering what form the memorial shall take.

The Rev. G. F. Coleridge seconded, and remarked that it had been a great disappointment to him to find that many of the large Associations had absolutely taken no notice at all. In one of the Associations, where the secretary had worked the matter 79 towers had sent in £15. If all the Societies had done that there would have been money enough and to spare. One Association with over a thousand members had sent two individual contributions of 5s., but absolutely nothing from the Association.

Mr. W. Snowdon suggested that the committee should not take the result as final, but that they should make a further appeal.

The Rev. C. W. O. Jenkyn said they were quite prepared to send any further amount of circulars, if they only had some notification where they were to be sent to.

The motion was carried.

THE LATE MR. R. S. STORY.

The Rev. G. F. Coleridge said it would be within the memory of all that since their meeting last year, they had lost a very distinguished member of the Central Council, one who did an enormous amount of work in the North for ringing generally, and whose work upon the Standing Committee and the other committees of that Council was simply invaluable. He need hardly remind them that he spoke of the late Mr. Robert Story, and he moved “that the Council, having grateful recollection of the many and great services rendered to the Exercise by the late Mr. R. S. Story, instruct the secretary to send their sincere sympathy to Mrs. Story and family in their bereavement.”- The Rev. H. A. Cockey seconded the resolution, which was endorsed by the President, and carried by the members rising in their places.

COUNCIL’S FINANCIAL POSITION.

The Hon. Secretary presented the financial statement. He reported that the Council started at the last meeting with a balance in hand of £52 18s. 1d. Affiliation fees received were £12, and profits on sale of publications £2 6s. 1d., making a total of £67 4s. 2d. The expenditure was £3 8s. 6d., including £2 7s. expenses of the last meeting, and reporting thereof, leaving a balance in hand of £63 15s. 8d. (applause). He thought they might congratulate themselves that their balance was growing, but they must bear in mind that they had done no printing. When they began to publish, then their funds began to feel it. The Hon. Secretary then presented the publishers’ statement, showing the number of books sold during the year, and the number remaining in hand.

The Rev. G. F. Coleridge proposed the adoption of the financial statement, and it was seconded by Mr. F. B. Tompkins.

The President said he considered the Exercise supported the publications by the Central Council exceedingly ill. He conceived that no ringers other than conductors ever took in any of the Council’s publications, and he should think a very small number of conductors did so, according to the number of sales. He thought the Exercise ought to encourage this work of the Council a little more, and the members of the Council might go back and inform the members of the Associations of the value of the publications.- The balance sheet was adopted.

THE HONORARY MEMBERS.

The President said two hon. members dropped out this year automatically, the Rev. E. W. Carpenter and Mr. Thomas Lockwood. Mr. Lockwood had been incapacitated from doing any work for a long time, and their Yorkshire friends had informed the Standing Committee that it was really useless to continue to elect him. Mr. Lockwood had done very good work for the Council in the past, but he (the President) was sorry he was not likely to do any work for them again. Mr. Carpenter was a valued member of the committee, and a most regular attendant. The Standing Committee did not at the moment know they were in need of any help they had not already got, but it was open to the Council to propose another member or two. With the re-election of Mr. Carpenter they would have twelve, and that would leave them with three vacancies. They always liked to have a few vacancies in case they required them at some time.

On the motion of the Rev. C. E. Matthews, seconded by Mr. H. White, the Rev. E. W. Carpenter was re-elected, amid applause.

Mr. E. H. Lewis suggested the election of Mr. H. W. Wilde, who, he said, would be of great service to the Collection of Peals Committee in helping to check the proof of Treble Bob peals.- Mr. W. E. White seconded the motion, which was carried.

THE PEAL COLLECTION COMMITTEE.

The Rev. H. S. T. Richardson reported, on behalf of the Peal Collection Committee, that the work was going on, and he hoped they might be able to publish an instalment soon. The difficulty was that members of the committee were busy men, and lived long distances apart, which made it awkward to meet, and they felt it was necessary to meet to discuss one or two things before they could publish. The work of proving was going on, and it was abundantly necessary. He did not want to exaggerate, but he thought he could say that out of every 30 or 40 peals he found one false. In a great many cases a note was appended that the alternative calling might be used to shorten or lengthen a peal, but he had found that if the note were carried out the peal became false. That brought the proportion of false peals up still higher. He was keeping steadily on with the work, but there were a great number to be got through. He hoped the committee would be able to meet fairly soon, and that before very long they would see one instalment brought out (applause).

On the motion of the Hon. Secretary, seconded by the Rev. H. S. T. Richardson, Mr. Wilde’s name was added to the committee.

NO REPORT FROM CHURCH PRESS COMMITTEE.

The Rev. H. A. Cockey said he believed he was the only member of the Church Press Committee present. Mr. Daniell had been doing most of the work, and he (Mr. Cockey) had received no notification from him. He could give the Council no information on the matter.

The Rev. M. Kelly said he was in the same position. They had all been trying to get the Press to take more notice of ringing matters, and members must have been pleased to see that the newspapers gave some recognition to Mr. Robert Haworth, when he died. The Press was beginning to recognise the ringing world more than it had done.

The President said he was quite certain Mr. Daniell was very keen about the work, and that if he were present he would be able to report progress.

Subsequently a message was received from Mr. Daniell that he was not well enough to attend the meeting.

SEVEN HUNDRED PLAIN MAJOR METHODS.

The report of the Legitimate Methods Committee was made by the Rev. H. Law James. He said they were dealing with the Plain Major Methods, and there were, roughly speaking, 700 of them. He hoped the result would be that they would see no more rubbish published. When folk wanted to compose new methods, he should recommend them to get the Rules and Decisions of the Committee and study the question as to what a method was. “Plain Methods are worked out, gentlemen,” said Mr. James, “and it is no use anyone going any farther.” “Here they are,” he added, holding up a book of considerable size, “and the secretary will receive them when we have done with them. We are going carefully through them, to select from them those methods which we consider are worth printing. We shall ask you to print all the old Standards and a certain number of new methods which contain either points of real interest or look like being of real use from a practical point of view, and it will make a small book.” Mr. James added that he was glad to hear that the sale of the volume of Minor Methods was gradually increasing. In the course of another ten years, he believed, the increase of sales would be by leaps and bounds, because as people got hold of that book and studied it they would find there was something in it worth knowing (applause).

Mr. J. A. Trollope said if ringers who had got or knew of methods rung and published in years gone by - whether they were good ones or bad ones they could leave to the committee - would send the names to Mr. James it would be helpful. In the book, when it came out, the majority of methods, of course, would be unnamed, but they wanted as far as possible to print the title to the methods.

Replying to Mr. E. H. Lewis, Mr. James said a corrected copy of the Minor Methods was being kept, and the names were being added as they were rung.

A USEFUL SUGGESTION.

Mr. J. W. Parker said since the publication of Legitimate Methods, it had always struck him there was a certain danger with regard to Superlative Minor. It stated in the preface that the method would not produce 720. The book might get into the hands of a company who would not trouble to read the preface, and they might ring it in a peal of seven methods, not noticing the false rows coming up. If they did, when the falseness of the peal was pointed out to them, they would certainly blame the committee of the Central Council responsible for the publication of the book. Mr. Parker also suggested that for the benefit of ringers whose knowledge might be limited, the book should point out how bobs should be made in the methods.

The Rev. H. Law James said the laws for making bobs were in the report on bobs, and for that reason the committee left them out of the Legitimate Methods volume, because they felt they were interfering with other folks’ work.

The President: You mean you want them together?

Mr. Parker: Certainly, sir. A band might purchase the book and know nothing of the former publication.

The President: Your point is that it may get into the hands of someone who may think it is self-contained, whereas it is not. You want more information so as to make it more useful all round.

Mr. Parker: That is so.

The Rev. H. L. James: I take it in the Major Methods we should include bobs in the publication?

Mr. Parker: Certainly, I think so.

Mr. E. H. Lewis said, from his own experience in Cheshire, he was sure the fact that the book was not self-contained had seriously interfered with its sale.

The President said he had no doubt the committee would take the matter into consideration. It had been pointed out with considerable force he thought, that the next issue should be self-contained. He proceeded to issue a word of warning to those who would rush into print with new methods. With regard to the composition of peals, said the President, any ringer thought he was good enough to start into print. No mathematician or astronomer would go into print with figures which were the results of an untutored brain. If he did he would be laughed at, but a man who was a ringer thought he could make a fool of himself as much as he liked (laughter). He thought it was extremely desirable there should be a dignity about entering into the columns of the papers, and that they ought not to publish all this nonsense which actually went to show them up as a parcel of idiots (laughter and applause).

PEAL VALUES.

The report of the Peal Values Committee, which has been published in these columns, was moved by Dr. A. B. Carpenter, who said the object of the committee had been to draw up a schedule which would give a higher scale of points to the higher number of bells without unduly depressing the points for peals on seven bells. As to the schedule for six bell peals it would need a little alteration, for taking as an example a peal of six Surprise Methods and one broken-lead method, the points would be 26 plus 5, which was one more point than a peal in seven Surprise Methods. The schedules recommended by the committee were as follows:-

A.- For peals on seven bells and upwards:-

The foregoing schedule is calculated by the formula VN ² ÷ 64, i.e., multiply the number found in the column headed “Value” by the number of bells, and the product by the number of bells once more, and divide the last product by 64.

B.- For peals on six bells:-

For 42 six scores of Doubles your committee recommend three points.

The Hon. Secretary, who seconded, pointed out that Schedule A was drawn up in obedience to the discussion which took place at the meeting last year, at which it was felt very strongly by some speakers that there was not sufficient points given for peals on the higher number of bells.

Mr. G. P. Burton said he had never yet grasped why it was really necessary to have a formula.

The Hon. Secretary replied that if they did not have a formula they were thrown back on the hopeless confusion of the old system, by which every method was given a perfectly and absolutely haphazard number of points. If anyone could suggest a better system for a formula, the committee would be only too thankful to adopt it.

Mr. J. A. Trollope said it would be impossible to give satisfaction to everybody, because different methods appealed to different people differently. What was an easy method to one man was not easy to another, and another thing was that a method which was structurally complex, was not necessarily a complex method to ring. The only thing they could get was something like a fairly round system of points, which would give approximately the value. The difficulty in ringing consisted of two things. First of all they had to know what to do; and, secondly, they had to know how to do it. The first, of course, was to know the method; the second was what they called ropesight. When they could ring Stedman Doubles they knew what to do in Stedman Cinques, but the ropesight was another matter entirely (hear, hear). That was where people who judged methods from paper or from having rung a plain course went hopelessly wrong, because they got an erroneous idea of what it took to ring the method.

PEALS ON TWELVE BELLS.

The Rev. H. L. James said he was going straight back to what he said last year, that when they came to ring Royal, Cinques and Maximus, to a great extent, it was like ringing changes learned by heart (‘No, no’). Take Treble Bob Maximus, 8, 10, 12, 11, 9, 7, coursing carried them right through a peal, the ropesight beyond 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, meant but one more figure. Mr. James went on to show how, in his own experience, attempts for peals on the higher number of bells had been more successful than on the lower numbers. From this experience he drew the conclusion that extra points for ten and twelve bell ringing were not necessary, and he, therefore, strongly disagreed with the formula. If they were going to cut the bells “all over the show,” it would be a different matter; then, by all means, give extra points, but they did not want to do that, because it would be bad music.

Mr. Burton asked the Council not to pay too much attention to Mr. James’ experiences, because he was such an exceptional individual. These schemes were drawn up for performances by ordinary people. As a member of a twelve bell band, he knew the bitter disappointments there were, and the trouble they had, and it was not quite as easy as it was for an extraordinary ringer like Mr. James. The point he wanted to bring before the Council was that, having to look after twelve bells and having to keep abreast of the times in learning the every-day Major methods, the twelve bell ringer was terribly handicapped, and it put twelve bell companies at a disadvantage. Therefore, he claimed, when a peal was rung on twelve bells the company did really deserve all the points for the higher numbers as had been proposed. They ought to remember also that the difficulty was increased by the extra number of men that had to be kept together, and kept in practice, and the extra difficulty of ringing twelve bells. Most of those present would agree, he thought, that there was a vast extra difficulty in ringing twelve as compared with ringing eight, or even as compared with ringing ten. The twelve bell ringer was looked upon as a sort of plutocrat, but he was really a very hardly dealt with individual. He was like those unfortunate individuals who had a lot of money and did not know what to do with it (laughter).

Mr. A. T. King said he would like to see an end put to ringing a six-bell peal with six methods of one class and one of an inferior class to make up the seven 720’s such as six 720’s of Treble Bob and one of a plain method. In such cases he would reduce the value of the peal to that of seven plain methods, for there was no earthly reason why one of the Treble Bob methods could not be repeated to make the seven.

The Rev. H. L. James: Suppose the one plain method to make up happens to be a good deal harder than the Treble Bob methods, what then? I could give you seven plain methods which will take a vast deal more ringing than seven Surprise Methods (laughter).

Mr. King: Then, perhaps, those experienced in six-bell ringing will say what they have to say about it.

The Rev. E. W. Carpenter thought the committee’s proposal of three points for 42 six-scores of Doubles, if rung on five bells without a cover was rather hard on the five-bell ringers, because it must be a difficult thing, if rung in a variety of methods.

The Rev. H. L. James said he considered the six-bell ringer was very badly treated in the schedule. The points allowed for six-bell peals were put down a great deal too low, compared with eight-bell peals. Cambridge Surprise Minor distinctly took more ringing than Major (“No,” and laughter). All he could say was that with six of the best of their ringers in South Lincolnshire they had had a great many starts for a peal of seven 720’s of Cambridge Minor, but the peal had not yet been rung. Eight of them, however, had rung Cambridge Major.

The Ringing World, June 16th, 1911, pages 210 to 212

The discussion upon the report of the Peal Values Committee was continued by Mr. J. Griffin, who moved, as an amendment, the substitution of the following for Schedule A.

He assured the Council it was not done in any sense in depreciation of the valuable work of the committee. The Peals Analysis Committee were not asked for any opinion, but two of them thought the schedule proposed by the committee was likely to meet with great opposition as regards the number of points for the higher number of bells. They, of the Analysis Committee, were anxious that the matter should be settled, and rather than it should be referred back decided to offer an alternative formula for the points. Mr. Griffin then explained the difference in the two schedules.

Mr. King, who, seconded, said the effect of the amendment was to lessen a little the values for peals on the larger numbers of bells, and of increasing the values below Major, which was supposed to be the standard, so to speak. In the past, Stedman Triples had always had 24 points allotted to it. Schedule A said, in future, they must be content with 18, but under the amendment they screwed this number up to 20, which was an advantage, because it gave the same value, at all events, as a peal of Double Norwich. As Schedule A had it, they got less for Stedman than for Double Norwich, and those in the habit of ringing thought that was rather an aggravation of the situation. He had submitted the matter to Mr. William Pye, who had had probably as much experience of ringing on the higher numbers of bells as anybody, and his opinion was that, as regards calling, no doubt Stedman Triples was as hard as calling Stedman Cinques, but when it came to conducting there was a different tale to be told. That, therefore, was a reason for giving a higher value for peals on twelve bells, because of the greater difficulty of conducting. Mr. Pye had also furnished him with what he considered the relative values of Stedman. He put them at 24 for Triples, 30 for Caters, and 40 for Cinques. There they had the opinion of an expert given without any formula whatever, and it nearly agreed with the table brought forward by Mr. Griffin, which allotted 29 to Caters and 39 to Royal. He thought they had got a great step forward in this matter of points, and he hoped it would he brought to a clear issue that day and settled once and for ever. Some people did not care a great deal about points at all, but he believed the greater number of ringers were really interested in the analysis, and anything that could be done to put it upon a more permanent and stable ground would be welcomed.

The Rev. H. S. T. Richardson said they had heard the two sides as to higher points for the higher numbers of bells, and he thought the amendment might be accepted as a compromise, and passed.

After the luncheon interval, the Council considered Schedule A. The President pointed out that an amendment of such a drastic character could not be deliberately forced down the throats of the committee, who had devoted a great deal of time to the matter. He suggested, therefore, that it might be approved by the meeting and referred to the committee for their serious consideration. To force the amendment upon the committee would result, he thought, in every member of the committee at once resigning. It was not a proper way to treat a committee.

NO CAST-IRON RULE.

Mr. Burton said he did not like the Schedule altogether, but he liked the amendment less. Both sides seemed to have lost sight of the fact that there could be no rule without an exception. The Schedule could not be applied in a cast-iron way. There were anomalies in both, and in the amendment, for instance, they were giving less points to Double Norwich Maximus than they were to Stedman Cinques. Surely the Council could not swallow that. He would be prepared to accept the Schedule A, subject to certain little modifications to meet the anomalies, by which, for example, Stedman Triples was given less than Double Norwich Major. They could not hope to get anything near perfection.

Mr. Tompkins asked if it did not come back to a question of the classification of the methods.

The Hon. Secretary thought Mr. Burton’s objections might be met very largely, if not altogether, by reconsideration of the methods they put into various classes.

The Rev. H. T. S. Richardson suggested that they might consider whether they should not allot points on the basis of the number of places in a method, because the more places, the more intricate the method. It might be much less practical on eight than on six bells, but it was a question that might be considered.

The Rev. H. L. James: I think you will find that Superlative and Cambridge have more places than London.

The President said the arguments as to the number of men that had to be brought together for the higher numbers of bells seemed to him to be entirely beside the mark. They might just as well argue that with more ropes there was greater risk of one breaking. They might also bring in the weight of metal, as had been done in bygone years. It had practically been decided that none of these things could be taken into consideration in their peal values.

The amendment was carried by 25 votes to 12, and the Council then proceeded to discuss Schedule B.

The Rev. H. L. James suggested that they should go on with the present system for another twelve months, and communicate with representative ringers, asking them to set the point values to the different methods.

The President asked if that would not lead people who rang one method to put an exaggerated value upon it.

The Rev. H. L. James: Certainly, but you won’t take one opinion, you will take opinions from all parts of the country,

The Rev. E. W. Carpenter spoke of the extra work which would be thrown upon the Peals Analysis Committee if the committee had to examine the various minor methods to see in which class they had to be placed.

Mr. King said he had considerable sympathy with those who rang Doubles. There were hundreds of towers with only five bells, and he thought the ringers ought to be encouraged. Where they rang a peal in several methods, it was not much encouragement to give them only two points. It would be a very fine thing to lay down a rule that where a tower had six bells and determined to ring Doubles instead of going on to something higher and better in Minor, they should still get no more than two points, because they were capable of better things.

Mr. G. Bolland thought the scale brought forward by the committee would go very satisfactorily, and he thought they might fall in with Schedule B. With regard to what had been said about ringing six Treble Bob Methods and one plain method, he would rather have that one plain method in a peal than repeat one again. The custom of Yorkshire ringers was to get as many methods as they could.

The Hon. Secretary thought objections might be met by altering the Schedule so that for every 720 in a Plain method one point would be awarded, for every 720 in a Treble Bob method 2, for every 720 in a broken lead method 3, and for every 720 in a Surprise method 4.

The Rev. H. L. James pointed out that this would not do, because a peal of seven 720’s of Bob Minor would get the same number of points as a peal in seven different plain methods.

Mr. J. S. Pritchett suggested as a way out of the difficulty, that two points should be added to each of the figures in the last column.

Eventually the report was referred back to the committee to consider the various suggestions made for its amendment.

THE PEALS ANALYSIS.

Mr. A. T. King moved the adoption of the Peals Analysis Committee’s report, which has appeared in these columns. He did not know, he said, how far the work of the committee might be affected by a subsequent resolution, but if the members expected the committee to grope about in two papers, analysing first one and then the other, they would be setting them a task which the committee certainly would not appreciate. If ringers would take the trouble to send a report to each of the papers, then the work would be simplified, and the committee provided with a complete check.- Mr. Griffin seconded.

The President expressed gratitude to the committee for the enormous work which they had done. Whether ringers liked or did not like scoring on points, they could not get away from the fact that it was one of the most interesting things which they had to look at.- The report was adopted.

PEALS OF MINOR.

The Rev. H. L. James moved: “That nothing shall be recognised as a peal of Minor, unless it consists of at least seven true and complete seven hundred and twenties, but that the 5040 may be extended by the addition of one touch of less than 720 changes, with or without extra 720’s.” Mr. James said years ago the Council so defined a peal of Minor that it must consist of seven true and complete 720’s. That stood for some time, and was then withdrawn, because people wanted to ring 360’s, in order to make up fourteen methods, and at that time it was not considered possible to make up fourteen methods in complete 720’s. As long as it was not considered possible to do so, he thought the Council perfectly justified, because it was an improvement upon ringing seven methods to ring fourteen. But the fact that it was only possible to ring seven 720’s in seven methods had disappeared. They could ring seven 720’s now in fourteen methods, or even more, and that not only in Plain methods, but in Surprise methods as well, and that put a different complexion upon it. Without being satisfied with 360’s running round at the end of each, they went a stage higher, and changed from one method to the other at a bob. What they had to do was to get methods with the same rows in the plain courses. He had rung a peal on these lines, and could assure them it was very good fun. In their seven 720’s they changed from one method to another 38 times from beginning to end. There were friends there fond of ringing 14 methods, and this was a lead he hoped they would follow. As soon as six-bell ringers realised it was possible to come up to a higher level and make their peals of Minor consist of seven true and complete 720’s, there would not be one six-bell ringer in the country prepared to speak against it.- Mr. R. Richardson seconded.

The Rev. M. Kelly, having raised the question as to whether the Council regarded peals of Minor as peals or merely performances, the President said in 1892 the Council passed a resolution that the conditions essential to the validity of a peal on five bells was that it should consist of at least 5040 changes, rung without a cover in six-scores, and that on six bells that it should be rung without cover and in true 720’s, of which no two in the same method should be called alike. Owing, however, to grave difficulties that arose from the different way in which peals of Minor and Doubles were regarded, there was so much dissatisfaction that in 1897 the following resolution was passed: “That the Council recognising the insuperable objection taken by many six-bell ringers to the definition of a peal of Minor as carried at the meeting in 1892, and recognising, also, that the fact that on five and six bells no actual true peal of 5000 changes can be rung, and that, therefore, no strictly correct definition of such a peal can be logically formulated, do now decide to expunge such definition from the standing resolution, thus offering no opposition to the varying local construction of the term ‘peal’ in regard to five and six-bell performances.”- The President said that this was arrived at after considerable difficulty, and it aught to be rescinded only after the most careful consideration. While he applauded Mr. James’ ideal he would point out that many six-bell ringers raised insuperable objection to the definition, and if they did that, how much more would they take objection to the infinitely more stringent resolution of Mr. James.

The Rev. H. L. James: I don’t see that it is more stringent; it simply recognises the fact that it is possible to get seven true 720’s in more than seven methods.

Mr. J. W. Parker said, having heard Mr. James’ clear definition he thought they must all agree with him that it was the correct way to ring more than seven methods of Minor, in order to get the least repetition possible in the 5040, but if the resolution was carried that day they would be doing an injustice to certain bands who might be practising for a peal in 14 methods that might not couple up in the way suggested by Mr. James. He would propose therefore that the Council put the motion forward this year as a recommendation and next year bring it up again.- Mr. Lewis seconded.

The Rev. H. L. James said he would be glad to accept that suggestion. He thought it met the case very nicely indeed.

Mr. W. E. White asked how many rounds were permitted between each of the 720’s in a peal. He believed in same places it was customary to ring a whole pull after the bells came round before going off again.

The Rev. H. L. James: Then you cannot call it a peal.

Mr. W. Snowdon agreed with the scientific point Mr. James had raised, and thought it would be an excellent thing to educate six-bell ringers to the more refined method of ringing the peals, but it would be a very dangerous thing to thrust it down the throats of the six-bell ringers.

The Rev. H. L. James: I will throw out a challenge to Yorkshire. We have done the job over the border; you came up to the mark Mr. Bolland, and ring it (laughter).

Mr. Bolland: On paper, I admit Mr. James is ahead of me, but in the belfry I am not frightened of Mr. James, nor anybody else (laughter and applause).

The resolution, amended to read, that the Council recommend that peals of Minor shall consist of at least seven true and complete 720’s etc., was then put, and carried nem con.

TERRITORIAL REPRESENTATION

Mr. W. Story proposed: “That for the purpose of representation on the Central Council, only such members of any Territorial Association as are resident within the area covered by that Association shall be considered in fixing the number of representatives which such Association is entitled to elect:” This, he said, might seem a somewhat democratic sort of motion, for it made the votes of one value instead of being of very varying value. Some ringers were members of only one Association, or possibly two, while some were members of fourteen or fifteen, and consequently were more highly represented. He thought the justice of the case would recommend itself to the members. The resolution excluded such Associations as the College Youths and the Cumberlands, which were historical societies, and entitled to representation, although their members were all members of other Associations, which were territorial.- Mr. W. A. Cave seconded.

Mr. A. T. King: said the resolution created many more difficulties than it was intended to remove. He supposed no two Associations could be dealt with on the same lines. They found one difficulty when they said they were obliged to exclude the College Youths and Cumberlands, and other great Societies, but there were a great many Associations which impinged on the ground of other Associations. He would like to know how his own Association would stand, where in the case of the great Metropolis people earned their living in London and went to sleep in the country round. They had many members of the Middlesex Association who resided out of London, but who earned their living in London. His Association, with 383 members, was entitled to three representatives. He did not care a button whether they lost one or not, but at the same time he did not see what was to be gained by it. If people thought they were hardly used by over-representation of other Societies, it would be different.

Mr. J. A. Trollope hoped the Council would not pass the resolution, because their difficulties were great enough at present, and they did not want them increased. The old London Societies were not prepared to admit that any of the newer Societies had a territorial right to London at all. He did not want to stir up any feeling on the matter, but he did not want the discussion to be raised again as to whether or no an outside Society like the Kent, for instance, had a right to South London, but if the Council passed the resolution, the question was bound to came up again.

The Rev. M. Kelly said, as the representative of the County Association, there was a difficulty the mover had not realised. There were on the list of his Association members who had left the county, but who were not members of any other Association. Surely they ought to be represented.

The Rev. C. E. Matthews said he did not think they had ever had any difficulty in the Winchester Guild with regard to overlapping with the Surrey Association. He believed before very long the diocese of Winchester would be divided, and then in all probability the Surrey Rural Deaneries would go over to the Southwark Diocese, and they would have the Winchester Diocesan Guild entirely confined to Hampshire.

The Rev. H. S. T. Richardson asked what was the relationship between the Yorkshire Association and the Cleveland Association, and Mr. Snowdon replied that the Yorkshire Association covered the whole county.

The President said if the Council decided to pass this resolution, it would be wise to do so in somewhat less direct terms than it was worded, because it was a little delicate for them to dictate to the Associations. He thought it would be wiser to send the resolution to the Associations for their judgment before carrying it in to effect. If they wanted to carry the motion, he hoped they would accept the alteration he suggested. He did not consider they had power as a Council to carry it as it stood.

The motion, on being put, was lost by a large majority.

The discussion on “The Ringing World” was reported under a separate heading.

At the conclusion of the meeting, a vote of thanks was accorded the President for presiding, on the motion of the Rev. G. F. Coleridge.

The Ringing World, June 23rd, 1911, pages 228 to 229