| Description | Present at the meeting: Professor N Kurti in the chair; Mr R H Ellis; Mrs M Gowing; Professor R V Jones; Sir David Martin; Professor W D M Paton; Sir Robert Somerville; Dame Veronical Wedgwood; Dr R E W Maddison, Dr R M MacLeod, Mr J Friday, Mr H M G Baillie and Mr R A Storey in attendance.
1. Chairman welcomed Mrs M Gowing representing the Historica Manuscripts Commission, and Professor R V Jones, representing the Roya Society, replacing Sir Hatrold Hartley and Prfessor Andrad who were unable to attend from ill-health. Aklso welcomed Dr Macleod and Mr Friday of the University of Sussex to attend this meeting.
2. Minutes of last meeting agreed and signed.
3. Matters arising from minutes - item 9; Sir David Martin reported he had been in correspondence with the president of the Royal Society of Edinburgh
4. Draft of Dr Maddison's 'Guide' circulated to members of the Committee and discussed in detail. Amongst matters raised were the imbalance between entries, much information being recorded for some scientists and relatively little for others of o less prominence; the inclusion of detailed lists of correspondents for some scientists, but not all; the need for an index to these correspondents, since no cross-referenceing had been carried out; the existence of scientists papers in certain of the PRO classes; the inclusion of an Appendix listing those scientists for whom personal papers have been sought but not found; the inclusion of blank leaves in the fina publication to facilitate annotation; the relative merits of letter-press and offset-litho production of thetext; the explanation of terminology and abbreviations; the need to underline the names fo those persons whose papers were recorded.
As it was generallya considered to be of great importance t produce a volume as quickly as possible, prefaced as necessary with a note on the interim nature of the findings, it was agreed that the 'Guide' should be reproduced as it stood for publicationby Her Majesty's Stationery Office in offset-litho, subject to any points raised by members of the Committee aftrer their perulas of its contents in the next few weeks.
5. The Chairman reported on the measures i hand to obtain the necessary funds for extending the Pilot Scheme for preserving the personal papers of contemporary scientists and technologists. A copy of the appliction which he and Mr Ellis had submitted to the Wolfson Foundation on behalf of the Committee had been circulated. This would be considered by the Trustees of teh Foundation in November.
6. A verbal report was given to the Committee by Dr R M Macleod of the Logic, History and Policy of Sciences Division, University of Sussex on his work n the social history of science, which involved the location of scientists' papers of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.
5. The Chairman reported on the mattes in hand to obrain the necessary funds for extending the Pilot Scheme for preserving the personal papers of scientists and technologists. A copy of the appliction which hae and Mr Ellis had submitted to the Wolfson Foundation on behalf of the Committee had been circulated. This would be considered by the Trustees of the Foundation in November.
6. Verbal report from Dr R M MacLeod of the Logic, History and Pollicy f Science Division, University of Sussex, on his work on the social history of science, which involved the location of scientists papers of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. His first scheme, covering the scientific community, 1830-1914, and funded by the Social Science Research Council, had been completed, but the results had still to be edited for transmission to the National Register of Archives maintained by the Commission. Eventual publication in micro-fiche form was under discussion, to include negative as well as positive results, in terms of papers located. This survey had been concerned with scientists at all levels, not only the most eminent, and had collected information on some 2,500 scientists.
The second scheme, funded by the Royal Society, was still in progress. It concentrated on Fellows of the Royal Society, 1848-1939, and so provided a lead-in to the ground to be covered by the extension of the Pilot Scheme. Search for relicts of deceased scientists was not being undertaken in such detail as for the first scheme, ie no attempt was being made to use wills as a starting point.
In the course of discussion on Agenda items (5) and (7) the following points were raised;
i. The possibility of including details of family and next of kin and of any provision made for the preservation of personal papers in the personal information requested by the Royal Society from newly-elected Fellows. Sir David Martin undertook to examine this.
ii. The extent of the overlap of Dr Maddison's 'Guide' and Dr MacLeod's surveys (the former having a wider date-range, the latter a wider range of scientists for inclusion). Dr Maddison and Dr MacLeod undertook to compare their drafts and exchange information.
iii. Dr MacLeod's proposal to approach living Fellows whose careers lay within the period of his second survey. It was decided that the Royal Society should support Dr MacLeod in his approaches.
7. The Chairman reported that the Council of the Royal Society had enquired what provision was being made for the records held by scientific institutions and museums. It was felt that the Committee was unable to offer much assistance (beyond that normally provided by the Commission) until the itinerant archivists had been appointed. The offprint of the ASLIB 'Proceedings' on "The Archives of Twentieth Century Scientists and Technologists" and British Records Association 'Memorandum No. 18' "The Preservation of Modern Records; General Advice" would be appropriate to circulate.
8. The Recommendations of the Standing Commission on Museums and Galleries on the preservation of technological relics and records (a copy of which had been sent to members of the Committee) were received.
9. The Institution of Electical Engineers plan for the recording of historical electrical apparatus and records was noted.
10. Reported that Professor E S Pearson (whose father's papers were being listed with SSRC support) had asked whether notes which he had taken of lectures at Cambridge were of sufficient historical interest to preserve. It was felt that they were and that Cambridge University Library would be a suitable repository. Professor Kurti undertook to reply accordingly to Professor Pearson.
11. Mr Ellis and Mr Storey reported on the preservation of the papers of Sir Alfred Kempe FRS and Dr Cecil Desch FRS. The latter were being arranged and listed by Mr Storey in accordance with the Pilot Scheme's categories, prior to deposit in Sheffield University Library. It was suggested that Sussex University Library, which alrady had such scientific deposits as the papers of Sir Richard Gregory, would probably welcome the Kempe papers.
The questiom of a select list of repositories suitable for the deposit of scientific and technological papers (discussed at the last meeting) was again raised. Professor Paton suggested the compilation of a shor tlist f perhaps ten such repositories which could be sent to owners of MSS requiring advice on depsit. Mr Ellis stressed the importance of individual advice in such cases but undertook to see whether a suitable short list could be compiled.
12. The present position with regard to the proposed regulation of the export of MSS, following last year's 'Green Paper' was reported by Mr Ellis.
13. Date of next meeting - the Committee agreed to defer this until after the result of the application to the Wolfson Foundation was known. |