charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1"=
>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1479" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I don't think we reached a consensus on wh=
ether=20
weights should still be accepted as valid if a cast in staple has been cut =
out=20
and a central hole drilled. I rather think that the weight should revert to=
an=20
estimate, as clearly this work is going to remove a measurable amount from =
the=20
weight of the bell. Do others agree?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>A rather more tricky question can arise wh=
ere some=20
bells in a ring have had their canons removed during a restoraiton and some=
had=20
already lost them previously, but it isn't known which canons were removed =
when.=20
For example, the back ten at Taunton do not appear to have been weighed by=
=20
Whitechapel when rehung and augmented in 1922, and the published weights of=
the=20
back ten are still those of the 1885 Taylor restoration and=20
augmentation.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>From information supplied by Chris Pickfor=
d, I know=20
that in 1922 just over 2 cwt worth of canons were received at Whitechapel a=
s=20
scrap. This must include those from the 3rd, 4th and 9th of 12, as these ar=
e the=20
1885 bells and were clearly cast with canons but no longer have them. This=
=20
wouldn't account for this much scrap metal though - canons must have been=20
removed from one or more other bells, but without further evidence there is=
=20
absolutely no way of telling which and therefore knowing which weights are =
no=20
longer valid.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><BR>David</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>