Published weights

David Bryant davidbryant at h...
Sat Jan 29 21:53:59 GMT 2005

Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I don't think we reached a consensus on whether weights should still be acc=
epted as valid if a cast in staple has been cut out and a central hole dril=
led. I rather think that the weight should revert to an estimate, as clearl=
y this work is going to remove a measurable amount from the weight of the b=
ell. Do others agree?

A rather more tricky question can arise where some bells in a ring have had=
their canons removed during a restoraiton and some had already lost them p=
reviously, but it isn't known which canons were removed when. For example, =
the back ten at Taunton do not appear to have been weighed by Whitechapel w=
hen rehung and augmented in 1922, and the published weights of the back ten=
are still those of the 1885 Taylor restoration and augmentation.

>From information supplied by Chris Pickford, I know that in 1922 just over =
2 cwt worth of canons were received at Whitechapel as scrap. This must incl=
ude those from the 3rd, 4th and 9th of 12, as these are the 1885 bells and =
were clearly cast with canons but no longer have them. This wouldn't accoun=
t for this much scrap metal though - canons must have been removed from one=
or more other bells, but without further evidence there is absolutely no w=
ay of telling which and therefore knowing which weights are no longer valid=

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the Bell-historians mailing list