Referee's report by Richard Tetley Glazebrook, on a paper 'An analysis of the results from the Kew Magnetographs on quiet days during the eleven years 1890-1900 etc.' by Charles Chree

Description

Sectional Committee: not stated [Physics and Chemistry]

No clear statement regarding publication in Philosophical Transactions. Explains that he has had no time to look over the paper by Chree which was referred to him. He just glanced through it in great haste. He agrees that the results in sections three to twelve are not in themselves of very great value. They do serve to give completeness to the paper and show what may be obtained from the Kew records. The same is the case with regards to sections 61-70. Schuster saw the paper at an earlier stage and has discussed it from time to time with Chree. It seems to him likely the paper as a whole does contain distinct additions to their knowledge. Most of the results summarized in the curves are, he thinks, of very real value. The paper is probably longer than necessary. Schuster does not see an attempt to get more out of the records than they will bear but feels a certain amount of sympathy with the criticism that parts of the paper are more suitable for the annals of an observatory than the 'Philosophical Transactions' but ventures to point out that for years Kew Observatory has been the observatory of the Royal Society and that the Committee of the observatory under whose direction the results now sent for publication were obtained, were not in a position themselves to undertake publication. Schuster has no hesitation in saying that the discussion of the results is desirable and that Chree is the best person to discuss them. Trusts the Committee will not make compliance with the referees suggestions a condition of publication though he thinks Chree might be asked to answer whether he could improve the paper by adopting them. If this course were taken Chree would probably consult Schuster and he could look in to the mater in more detail.

[Published in the Philosophical Transactions A, 1904].

Endorsed on recto as received 11 June 1903.

Reference number

RR/16/36

Earliest possible date

10 June 1903

Physical description

Letter on paper

Page extent

7 pages

Format

Manuscript