<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.18975"></HEAD>
<BODY style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #fff" bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>The carillon to which we are refering to is the one
where the bells were cast between 1923 and 1930 by G&J. The top bells WERE
melted down bar one, the 7th. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>May I suggest that one refers to Chapter XIII of
<EM>England's Child</EM> by the Late Jill Johnston, especially
p186.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>AAJB.</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=matthewhigby@Llz0RCeYoBIvMBDvtkdbJNLv8Op9JKfuqfMyHFz__I6JMldePNesqtPDRmfG7pMOHSEjnnubsPVuuLx2iDQRA-vqi6EXiF8.yahoo.invalid
href="mailto:matthewhigby@9cAF8BUeqXwXoYqEB545zmQG9cE6qPYwtHtr7iiphYWzUFS8498w3deF5mJLkNvTkmIn4A8r2GWSszt5Qw.yahoo.invalid">matthewhigby@9cAF8BUeqXwXoYqEB545zmQG9cE6qPYwtHtr7iiphYWzUFS8498w3deF5mJLkNvTkmIn4A8r2GWSszt5Qw.yahoo.invalid</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
title=bellhistorians@yahoogroups.com
href="mailto:bellhistorians@yahoogroups.com">bellhistorians@yahoogroups.com</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, October 31, 2010 7:22
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Bell Historians] Riverside
Carillon.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV><SPAN style="DISPLAY: none"> </SPAN>
<DIV id=ygrp-text>
<P>I am now quite confused! Are we talking about the new or old Riverside
<BR>bells? I was told that the front end bells of the Whitechapel
<BR>replacements are somewhat bigger than the originals, bin both diameter
<BR>and thickness. I also thought that carillon bells were numbered the
<BR>other way round from ringing bells - i.e. the biggest being no
1.<BR><BR>Best wishes,<BR><BR>Matthew<BR><BR>-----Original
Message-----<BR>From: Roderic Bickerton <<A
href="mailto:rodbic%40ntlworld.com">rodbic@pLBeFXkpjM3XBAiJcSTt3vUJOfAzHkNr4D0FF-vw0te_tK4epChUiaUsALGwiF3RGGFj-7ynXsGwqYAh.yahoo.invalid</A>><BR>To: <A
href="mailto:bellhistorians%40yahoogroups.com">bellhistorians@yahoogroups.com</A><BR>Sent:
Sat, Oct 30, 2010 8:41 pm<BR>Subject: Re: [Bell Historians] Riverside
Carillon.<BR><BR><BR>That would only give a soundbow thickness of
9/16", the small carillon <BR>bells I have seen are very thick, well over
1" thick<BR><BR>----- Original Message -----<BR>From: <A
href="mailto:Dwhgodwin%40aol.com">Dwhgodwin@oiPkFKnAUdWWLvLjEyfj65uLlO9_88KclV0WNBLopYIGDEuTiqFAjjIE_5mqn3EbZEFKTcLd5aCLEw.yahoo.invalid</A><BR>To: <A
href="mailto:bellhistorians%40yahoogroups.com">bellhistorians@yahoogroups.com</A><BR>Sent:
Saturday, October 30, 2010 4:13 PM<BR>Subject: Re: [Bell Historians] Riverside
Carillon.<BR><BR>Would 5 7/8" be the strike diameter at the thickest part of
the sound <BR>bow? would your informant be able to check
this?<BR>DG<BR><BR>-----Original Message-----<BR>From: Alan Buswell <<A
href="mailto:aaj.buswell%40btinternet.com">aaj.buswell@Ed0YgsvOTqPRhyLOMO66ITplnokENt0CJseAObUdGBrMZO7pa0tIW2Z1r5_M8SDrQHoKmJzx8-lncpcdtoCv3g.yahoo.invalid</A>><BR>To:
<A
href="mailto:bellhistorians%40yahoogroups.com">bellhistorians@yahoogroups.com</A><BR>Sent:
Sat, 30 Oct 2010 15:38<BR>Subject: Re: [Bell Historians] Riverside
Carillon.<BR><BR> <BR><BR>That's precisely what I'm wanting to know.
G&J says diameter is 5 7/8 <BR>inches, actual outside measurement, as
measured by my informant - 7 <BR>inches. The former measurement being the
inside.<BR> <BR>AAJB.<BR><BR>----- Original Message -----<BR>From:
Roderic Bickerton<BR>To: <A
href="mailto:bellhistorians%40yahoogroups.com">bellhistorians@yahoogroups.com</A><BR>Sent:
Saturday, October 30, 2010 3:12 PM<BR>Subject: Re: [Bell Historians] Riverside
Carillon.<BR><BR> <BR><BR>Hoe very odd, Hoe on earth can you
sensibly determine an inside diameter <BR>at the lip the shape being
a curve?<BR>sounds an implaudable explanation.<BR><BR>On 24 October 2010
15:46, alanaj8283 <<A
href="mailto:aaj.buswell%40btinternet.com">aaj.buswell@Ed0YgsvOTqPRhyLOMO66ITplnokENt0CJseAObUdGBrMZO7pa0tIW2Z1r5_M8SDrQHoKmJzx8-lncpcdtoCv3g.yahoo.invalid</A>>
wrote:<BR><BR> <BR><BR>My attention has been drawn to the fact that there
may be two ways of <BR>measuring a bell's diameter. Bell No.7 of the G&J
Riverside Carillon, <BR>weighing only 15lbs, has been measured as 7" (no typo
error)on the <BR>outside (lip to lip)but in the G&J Tuning Books it is
given as 5 7/8". <BR>The measurements have been checked by my informer and
shows the smaller <BR>measurement to be that of the INSIDE of the bell. What
of the other <BR>bells here, I wonder?<BR><BR>Is this the usual practice of
Cyril or may be anyone else?<BR><BR>AAJB<BR><BR></P></DIV><!-- end group email --></BODY></HTML>