[Bell Historians] EIG
dave at OhY3N1MKdxlzEffC4bSLha5C2dHwI0FNhrlwM7KKeMqITNcgqueTEtGMUlH-RkDZEZnAhbVbmHU24ayGPQ0WYwO2y-4.yahoo.invalid
Mon Jan 21 18:22:57 GMT 2008
If this is reason no.1, what are the rest like ?
St Mary de Castro insures with the Congregational & General, and very good value we have found them to be.
----- Original Message -----
From: Andrew Aspland
To: bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, January 21, 2008 5:05 PM
Subject: [Bell Historians] EIG
Not history but would the learned list care to comment on this quote from an Ecclesiaistical Insurance Senior Underwriter:
"The reasons that we prefer that the bells are left in the 'down' position are as follows:
"1. From the material damage point of view, if the bells are left in the 'up' position and a fire actually gets up into the tower above the bells, then debris will fall down into the bells themselves, rather than just bounce off them and fall to the ground.
"Then, the weight of the debris and the bells combined could cause serious damage not only to the bells but also potentially damage the bell frame, if not to the structure of the tower itself, and bearing in mind that you have quite a lot of bells then it could prove a real danger to the structure of your church."
This sounds like the idea of someone who has no idea of what it is like in a bell tower - and the last paragraph describes such a disasterous scenario that the bells being up or down would have little bearing on the matter.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Bell-historians