Showing 80617 results

Arising out of debate over 'Supply Function in Keynsian economics' by De Jong with D H Robertson's note 'Keynsian supply function...'

'Reprinted, with corrections, from Notes and Queries'
'Fifty copies privately printed'.

Typescript photocopy. A memoir of his life as a teacher, as a soldier injured in World War I, and as a student at Emanuel College.

'Lucretius', 4 pp. ms. 'Method of Science', 1 p. ms. 'Aims and Methods of Physical Science', 4 pp. ms.

Correspondents inclyde H M Homsy, L G Gibilaro, R Jackson, G B Wallis, R L Pigford and P Rowse

Autograph ms., pages numbered 3-41, with a note by G.K. Batchelor, 'Found in G.I's garage in a water-stained folder, July 1976'.
Although the pagination begins p.3, the paper begins `Some months ago Sir J.J. Thomson suggested to me to try and find some explanation of the action of crystal rectifiers, and the experiments described in this paper are the results of this suggestion'. It seems therefore that the missing pages 1 and 2 did not include the substance of the paper.
Also included is correspondence re the paper between G.K. Batchelor and A.B. Pippard, 1976.

Whitehall - A copy of a letter from 3rd Viscount Palmerston to Prince Albert (Vice-Chancellor) concerning the Commissioners Report on University reform.

(A printed form, on parchment, filled up by hand. With an envelope of a later date.)

(Marked on the back '20/4/58, WC No 2'.)

Wensleydale.—Submits some queries about imposition which have arisen in compiling a bibliography of Dodsley’s Collection.

—————

Transcript

In Wensleydale
17:8:24

My dear McKerrow

In working at a bibliography of Dodsley’s Collections† of Poems by several Hands I have struck difficulties about imposition, and should be grateful for advice.

The original work in 3 vols. 1748 (reprinted 1748, 1751) is a duodecimo of the ordinary kind. It was imposed ‘for cutting’; a conclusion suggested to me by the fact that a whole forme (ex hypothesi) is wrongly paged, and confirmed by the watermarks, which fall on the seventh and eighth or on the eleventh and twelfth leaves (or on both pairs when there were 2 watermarks; 2 different papers were used). There are numerous cancels; and I was pleased to find my conclusions from examination of stubs etc. very prettily confirmed by the w.-marks.

The chain-lines are horizontal.

But my difficulty begins with Vols. IV (1755) and V-VI (1758). They are uniform with the earlier volumes, but are in eights. The chain-lines being (in V, VI) horizontal. I assumed that the books were 16o printed in half-sheets, so that each sheet yielded two copies of an 8-leaf quire. This would mean the use of a paper of an unusual size; but it may have occurred to Dodsley that he could economize by getting an extra four pages on to each forme.

But while reposing in this hypothesis I discovered that some of the chain-lines are vertical!

In Vol. IV they are all vertical (and of course this volume may be 8o).

In Vol. V 19 signatures, & 2 prelim. leaves, are horizontal; but A8 & C8 are vertical.

In Vol. VI 20 signatures + 2 prel. leaves are horizontal; but X8 vertical.

There are unfortunately no watermarks in these 3 volumes.

I do not know of any uncut copy. My copy of V is 6¾ x 4¼, and I suppose may have been nearly 7½ x 5 (7 x 4½ is a minimum). I cannot see what imposition would get this on to a sheet so nearly square that it could be put in either way indifferently.

Please don’t think of going to the Museum and hunting out these books. I trouble you with my difficulty only in the chance that it may be quite simple and that the solution may be already familiar.

I expect you are very busy with No I {1}—I wish it all success.

Yours sincerely
R. W. Chapman

—————

Numbers in signatures and the 'o' in '16o' and '8o' are superscript in the original.

{1} The first number of the Review of English Studies.

† Sic.

5 Kami Nibancho, Kojimachi-ku, Tokyo.—Gives a detailed account of his three-week tour of Japan with [Hiroshi] Katayama. Has returned to Tokyo for the beginning of term.