[Bell Historians] RE Thin bells

[John Camp]

At 13:59 on 15 December 2004, daviesm at g... wrote:
> The below are both good

> Pluckley, kent 12-3-25 in E

> Chislet Kent 15-3-9 in Eb

> and of course Lavenham Suffolk 21-0-7 in Db

I see that I wrote, in 'From the E-lists' of 17 October 2003:

"David Hird, on the nabbers list, opined that ‘in general bells
underweight for their note are dustbins’. Not Lavenham, though (21cwt
in Dflat), retorted Michael Royalton-Kisch."

John Camp