CENTRAL COUNCIL METHODS COMMITTEE

METHOD EXTENSION

Arising out of the Methods Committee’s Report, it is now possible to state what extensions in Corrigan’s Surprise Royal and Maximus Book are to be retained under their original names, and the methods where the names given should be deleted.

Section 1 - Surprise Royal methods which have been rung to peals
Acceptable names (Royal)

†501Albanian‡513Melton
502Belgrave‡514Middlesex
*503Bristol*515Painswick
504Cambridge†516Prittlewell
505New Cambridge517Pudsey
†506Clifton518Rochester
†507Goldsborough*519Rutland
‡508Leicester*520Superlative (Shipway’s version)
509Lincolnshire*521Superlative (No. 2 version)
*510London (No. 1 version)522York
*511London (Brighton version)523Yorkshire
*512London (No. 3 version)

Section 2 - Extensions of Methods included in the Surprise Major Section
Acceptable names (Royal)

525Bedford†564Lindsey
*526Birmingham566Lowestoft
‡533Caister‡570Oakham
†534Pontefract573Selborne
535Clacton*574Staffordshire
538Devon*576Wembley
540Essex‡578Westcote
548Langley581Woodstock
550Leicestershire582Wycombe

* Not in accordance with the Methods Committee’s requirements, but rung before the date of the adoption of the report.
† Parent method, no relative Major.
‡ No corresponding Major or Maximus.

Section 2 (continued) - Unacceptable names which should now be deleted (Royal)

524Beaconsfield546Kent
527Bolton547Lancashire
528Bosmere549Lavenham
529Bristol (E. B. James)565London (U.A. version)
530Bristol (Drayton)567Mildenhall
531Bristol (Drayton)568Monewden
532Bromley569Newcastle
536Cornwall571Orwell
537Daventry572Peterborough
539Doncaster575Superlative (Drayton)
541Falmouth577Wendover (this is Albanian, 501)
542Gloucester579Whitbourne
543Helmingham580Willesden
544Howden
545Hughenden

The undermentioned is included in Section 2, but the relative Major method is not shown in the Major section:-

559 Extends from -.38.-.14.-.12.-.38.14.-. 14.38.-.14.-.7 (Lindoff’s No. 64)

Section 3 - Surprise methods first published for 10 bells

609Duplicate of 548 (Langley)
613Extends from -.34.-.14.-.58.-.16.-.14.-.38-.16-.5
622Solihull

Section 1 - Surprise Maximus Methods which have been rung to peals
Acceptable Names (Maximus)

801Bedford806Lindsey
802Belgrave807Pudsey
803Cambridge808Rochester
804New Cambridge*809Superlative
805Lincolnshire810York
811Yorkshire

Section 2 - Extensions to 12 bells of Surprise Methods for 8 or 10 bells
Acceptable Names (Maximus)

813Albanian848Prittlewell
814Birmingham*849Rutland (since renamed Belvoir)
*816Bristol†850S. Hugh
822Bromley†851S. Margaret’s
824Caerleon852Selborne
825Pontefract†857Verona
826Devon858Wembley
832Leicestershire861Wycombe
844Lowestoft

* Not in accordance with the Methods Committee’s requirements, but rung before the adoption of the Report.
† No Major or Royal.

Section 2 (continued) - Unacceptable names which should now be deleted (Maximus)

815Bolton842London (W. Taylor)
817Bristol (Drayton)843London (U.A. Version)
818Bristol (Drayton)845Manchester
819Bristol (E. B. James)846Oakham
820Bristol (E. B. James)847Peterborough
821Bristol (A. Y. Bramble)853Staffordshire
823Burslem854Superlative (Drayton)
827Doncaster855Superlative (Drayton)
828Hughenden856Superlative (A. Y. Bramble)
829Kent859Whitbourne
830Lancashire860Willesden
831Lavenham
840London (Drayton)
841London (Drayton)

Section 2 (continued) - Unnamed methods.
Acceptable extensions

860Parent 580 (late Willesden)
§835extends from-.38.-.14-.12.-.38.-.14.-.58.14.-.14.5
(Lindoff’s No. 61)
836extends from-.38.-.14.-.12.-.38.14.-.14.38.-.14.-.7
(Lindoff’s No. 64)
(No. 559 is in the same family)
§837extends from-.38.-.14.58.12.-.16.-.14.-.58.14.-.14.3
(Lindoff’s No. 83)
§838extends from-.38.-.16.-.56.-.38-.14.-.58.14.-.14.5
(Lindoff’s No. 110)

§ Ultimate place lead-head only.

N.B. - These four Major methods are in Corrigan’s Unnamed Methods Collection.

Section 2 (continued) - Unnamed methods.
Unacceptable extensions

833 shown as relative to 552 (Lindoff’s No. 8)
834 shown as relative to 556 (Lindoff’s No. 35)
835 shown as relative to 558 (Lindoff’s No. 61)
837 shown as relative to 561 (Lindoff’s No. 83)
838 shown as relative to 562 (Lindoff’s No. 110)
839 shown as relative to 563 (Lindoff’s No. 112)

Section 3 - Methods first published for 12 bells

864 Langley
866 Solihull
868 extends from 627

Acceptable names - Extensions not published in Corrigan’s Surprise book

RoyalMaximus
*Warwickshire*Aldenham
*AldenhamBuckingham
WyeWigston
Wye

* Not in accordance with the Methods Committee’s requirements, but rung before the date of the Report.

In regard to Birmingham Royal, Painswick Royal and Warwickshire Royal, all of which have been accepted solely on account of their being rung before the date of the Report, the following Maximus extensions will be recognised:-

Birmingham as 814
Painswick-.36.-.14.-.5T.-.16.-.12.-.5T.-.16.-.5T.-.18.-.7T.-.10.-.E
Warwickshire-.3T.-.14.-.12.-.3T.-.12.-.3T.-.14.-.5T.-.16.-.9T.-.10.-.E

On behalf of the Methods Committee.
K. W. H. FELSTEAD.

The Ringing World, February 12, 1954, page 109, corrections March 19, 1954, page 187

Valid HTML 4.01 Transitional