[r-t] parity

[Robin Woolley]

I have found it.

The article in question appears at RW73/583 (20th July) and confirms, in 
general terms, that my re-construction was correct. The only further points 
of significance are that Tony starts from 11111111, not 00000000, but he 
remarks that the right-most digit is always 0.

It is most curious that I bothered to keep a copy of the article, as I 
couldn't ring evern the treble to a touch of PB5 at the time.

Best wishes
Robin