[Bell Historians] Charlton Adam, Somerset

[Richard Offen]

> Agreed!
>  
> Speaking as a contractor who declined to quote for anything except 
the  
> modern fittings route! I am told that several other contractors 
also  declined to 
> quote.
>  
>  
> When I was consulted by the architect, I asked - Do the parish know 
what  
> they are getting out of a "conservation" scheme? If they are 
looking for a  ring 
> of bells on which they can train and maintain a local band, then 
perhaps  they 
> will run into problems. If they are looking for a ring of bells 
which can  be 
> rung by experienced ringers only, on what could well be a limited  
basis - 
> well perhaps they will be OK.
>  
> Looking after several local rings hung on late 19th/ early 20th C 
fittings,  
> I know how much extra care and maintenance an old style ring need. 
I  lost 
> count of the number of times the tenor clapper fell out of our old  
tenor at 
> Chilcompton - inc twice in one week!
> 
>  
> The whole scheme at Charlton Adam has been handled by a firm of  
conservation 
> architects, who want to keep as much as possible (as is their 
way).  Sadly 
> none of these are ringers, and refuse to be advised by ringers. I 
was told  that 
> the proposal was to keep as much of the original installation as 
possible,  
> including the timber headstocks, wheels, plain bearings etc.
>  
> Charlton Adam bells could easily be rehung with modern fittings, 
within the  
> CCC code of practice, for much less money than they want for the 
> "conservation"  restoration. 
>  
> Sorry - this makes me sound very anti-conservation which is far 
from the  
> truth, but I am also a realist. I agree that the bellframe at 
Charlton Adam  is 
> worth preserving, and I am sure that the scheme to strengthen it 
(devised by  
> Adrian Dempster) will work well. As with all projects, whoever the 
contractor,  
> I always want to see a good job done. I hate seeing money being  
wasted, 
> which is what if feel will happen in this case.
>  
> Nuff said.......
>  
> Matthew
>

Well said Matthew!

Richard