| Description | Present at the Meeting: Sir Harold Hartley int he chair; Professor Andrade; Professor Kurti; Professor Paton; Sir Robert Somerville; Mr Ellis; Mr BAillie and Dr Maddison were in attendance
1. Apoligies for absence from Dr Wedgwood and Dr Martin
2. Minutes of last meeting agreed and signed
3. Matters arising from the minutes;
3.i Discussed response to letter in the Timnes, which valuable but no large, Lord Lansdowne agreed at last to the listing of his papers aof scientific interest at Bowood.
3.ii Agreed the Guide need not be confined to the scientists named in the List. Dr Maddison given discretion to include further named and other collecitons should discoveries of importance be made.
3.iii The letter to be sent to custodians and owners fo MSS amended by suggestions from Professor Paton and Mr Ellis
3.iv The List amended further, and agreed that it should be laid before the Royal Society for final approval, and the Committee's thanks recorded to Professor Andrade, Professor Lighthill, Profesor Paton, Sir George Taylor, Professor McCrea and Sir Robert Somerville for their contributions to commpiling the List.
4. Dr Maddison reported on his progress in compiling the Guide.
5. Professor Kurti reported on the plan for preserving papers of contemporary scientists.
Mrs Gowing's report had been circulated to the Committee. Its purpose was to show how much work, time and money would be required for a first examination of the papers of scientists recently deceased. This first examination would consist of arranging the papers and making an outline list, ie a list identifying and describing th classes of papers within the collection but not describing individual papers. Mrs Gowing had examined the papers of PRofessor Wager, Sir Francis Simon, and Sir John Gaddum, ahd had estimated that to arrange and list in outline each of these collections would take one experienced archivist, helped by a clerk, about two weeks. the report had been laid efore the Committee, and Professore Kurti asked for their instructions upon how to proceed.
The principal matters for the subsequent discussion;
1. Mrs Gowing's report was accepted as very valuable, though her estimae of time was felt to be optimistic.
ii. The place of preservation of such papers was discussed. The Committee reserved judgment on the offer of the Science Museum to act as a repository for scientist's papers; the Chairman had enquired about the employment there of qualified archivists and was not altogether reassured by the Director's reply; he had seen, at Churchill College, the importance of employing archivally trained staff. The Chairman, supported by Sir Robert Somerville, deprecated the proposal of a special repository for scientists' (or at least FRS) papers as too expensive to be practicable, and urged the use of existing repositories, in particular University libraries. Professor Kurti, supported by Professor Paton, believed that University libraries would be unwilling and perhaps unfitted to receive these papers, and preferred the establishment of a central repository where all such collections could be studied in association. Should this really prove impracticable, Professor Paton suggested, Universities should at least appoint archivists, who would collect up a scientist's papers after his death and be qualified to arrange and list them.
iii. Sir Robert Somerville took up Professor Paton's last point and suggested that the Royal Society should appoint a "liaison officer" who would communicate with University libraries after the death of a Fellow and arrange with them the disposal of his papers.
iv. Professor Andrade proposed that copies of the papers of deceased Fellows should be made and assembled in one centre. Professors Kurti and Paton pointed out that this would be very expensive and would not solve the problem of storing the originals.
v. Professor Kurti urged that the problems and expense of full listing should not be allowed to obstruct the preservation of scientists papers. He believed that the first task was to assemble them; the second was to arrange and list them in outline; and listing in detail could come last.
Professor Kurti then proposed, and the Committee agreed,
1. That Mrs Gowing's report be passed to the Royal Society, for consideration by the Society's Council
2. That the Royal Society be asked to consider the outline listing of the papers of 1-3 scientists recently deceased, to establish beyond doubt the cost and the time required.
With regard to (2), it was suggested that the papers of Ssir John Gaddum, Sir Francis Simon and Professor R L Wager, which have alredy been looked at briefly by Mrs Gowing, might be so listed, and that the cost might amount to £500, of which a part would be borne by the Historical Manuscripts Commission.
6. The Committee agreed that a further approach should be made to Lady Simon, Lady Gaddum and Mrs Wager, to thank them for their co-operation and to indicate that Mrs Gowing's work upon their late husband's papers might presently be carried further.
7. Mr Ellis reported that offers to publish the "Guide" when completed have been received from Messrs Constable, Messrs Butterworth, and the Curwen Press; and that HM Stationery Ofice had agreed that a case could be made for official publication. The Committee agreed that the rights of publication should be offered first to HM Stationery Office.
8. Proposed by Sir Robert Somerville, and agreed by the Committee, that Dr Maddison should draft a notice, describing the scope and purpose of the "Guide" and soliciting help, for publication in the British Records Association's Journal 'Archives' and in the 'Journal of the Society of Archivists'.
9. The Committee agreed to meet again in the summer. |