Skip to content

Please be aware that some material may contain words, descriptions or illustrations which will not reflect current scientific understanding and may be considered in today's context inaccurate, unethical, offensive or distressing.

Referee's report by Cecil Henry Desch, on a paper 'The dehydration of copper sulphate pentahydrate' by John Hume and James Colvin

Reference number: RR/43/70

Date: May 1931

Description

Sectional committee: Chemistry

Recommended for publication in Proceedings, in full. The paper is interesting and concisely expressed.

[Published in Proceedings of the Royal Society A, 1931].

Endorsed on verso as received 1 May 1931.

Reference number
RR/43/70
Earliest possible date
May 1931
Physical description
Standardised form (type D)
Page extent
2 pages
Format
Manuscript

Creator name

Cecil Henry Desch

View page for Cecil Henry Desch

Use this record

Citation

Cecil Henry Desch, Referee's report by Cecil Henry Desch, on a paper 'The dehydration of copper sulphate pentahydrate' by John Hume and James Colvin, May 1931, RR/43/70, The Royal Society Archives, London, https://makingscience.royalsociety.org/items/rr_43_70/referees-report-by-cecil-henry-desch-on-a-paper-the-dehydration-of-copper-sulphate-pentahydrate-by-john-hume-and-james-colvin, accessed on 07 October 2024

Link to this record

Embed this record

<iframe src="https://makingscience.royalsociety.org/embed/items/rr_43_70/referees-report-by-cecil-henry-desch-on-a-paper-the-dehydration-of-copper-sulphate-pentahydrate-by-john-hume-and-james-colvin" title="Referee's report by Cecil Henry Desch, on a paper 'The dehydration of copper sulphate pentahydrate' by John Hume and James Colvin" allow="fullscreen" frameborder="0" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>

Related Publications

Related Fellows

Explore the collection

  • Referee Reports

    Date: 1832-1954

    This collection contains reports on scientific papers submitted for publication to the Royal Society. Started in 1832 when the system was formalised, it is a record of the origins of peer review publishing in practice.

    View collection