View previous topic | View next topic

Errors

Page 1 of 1

Molly Cule
156843.  Thu Mar 15, 2007 12:00 pm Reply with quote

I have no idea if this is true as I can only find sources on google which are obviously copied out of the book I am reading but one of you might know...

Sixty years after the First World War armistice was signed, the man who typed it admitted much of it was back to front, but no one had noticed.

The man was Henri Deledicq, a clerk posted to the railway carriage at Rethondes in which the armistice was signed.

He took down the words of the treaty dictated by Marshall Foch then put the carbon papers in the wrong way round as it was 5am and he was really tired. He didnt notice and neither did anyone who signed the treaty even though whole chunks were totally unreadable.

It was not until some time later that Foch found out bits of the treaty were gibberish, Mr Deledicq said Foch 'could hardly get over it'. Deledicq became a wine merchant and outlived everyone on the carriage.

 
DELETED
156877.  Thu Mar 15, 2007 1:53 pm Reply with quote

DELETED

 
dr.bob
157561.  Mon Mar 19, 2007 9:03 am Reply with quote

From wikipedia:

Quote:
Carbon paper is placed between the original and a blank sheet to be copied onto. As the user writes or types on the original, the pressure from the pen or typeface deposits the ink on the blank sheet, thus creating a "carbon-copy" of the original document.


How on earth would putting "the carbon papers in the wrong way round" cause the writing to appear back-to-front?

Sounds a bit fishy to me.

 
MatC
157563.  Mon Mar 19, 2007 9:07 am Reply with quote

As far as I can remember from carbon paper days, if you put it in the wrong way round you got nothing; you certainly couldn't get back to front writing.

 
suze
157567.  Mon Mar 19, 2007 9:25 am Reply with quote

Could he perhaps have been using a mimeograph? I had to use one once back in the day, and they are a complete pain.

One prepares a stencil by typing on a piece of waxed paper using a ribbonless typewriter, wraps this around the drum of the mimeo machine, and then feeds paper through to make the copies. And if one wraps the stencil around the drum the wrong way around, mirror image copies result.

I'd imagine a fair few copies of the Armistice document were needed, so this process seems to me more more appropriate than the use of carbon paper (can one create more than two legible copies using carbon paper?). Since NCR paper, photocopiers, and the Ditto machine (Banda machine to you British people) were all yet to be invented, that seems to me like the process most likely to have been used.

 
MatC
157575.  Mon Mar 19, 2007 9:41 am Reply with quote

Quote:
Could he perhaps have been using a mimeograph? I had to use one once back in the day, and they are a complete pain.


Is that what we call(ed) a Gestetner? That would make sense.

Quote:
(can one create more than two legible copies using carbon paper?)


Yes, but only a handful; I remember using multi-carbons in Fleet Street about 20 years ago; each copy was on different coloured paper; one for the writer, one for his editor, one for the subs, maybe one more.

 
suze
157580.  Mon Mar 19, 2007 9:48 am Reply with quote

MatC wrote:
Is that what we call(ed) a Gestetner? That would make sense.


Yes. And indeed, David Gestetner had started making them by 1918 so it could have been one of his that was used.

 
Flash
157649.  Mon Mar 19, 2007 2:16 pm Reply with quote

I guess the point about the carbon copy paper is that it would make a mirror-writing version on the back of each sheet (including the top one, which would then have writing on both sides of the paper.

 
dr.bob
157759.  Tue Mar 20, 2007 5:26 am Reply with quote

If that were true, it would hardly make any difference, surely. The original quote seems (to me) to imply that sections of the document were only present in a backwards form. If the entire document was present and readable, but some pages had some reverse writing on the back, I wouldn't have thought that would invalidate the treaty in any way.

 
Flash
157770.  Tue Mar 20, 2007 5:40 am Reply with quote

Only the top copy would have writing on both sides - the others would just have mirror writing on the back, the side that was in contact with the carbonised side of the carbon paper.

 
DELETED
157958.  Tue Mar 20, 2007 11:22 am Reply with quote

DELETED

 
DELETED
157962.  Tue Mar 20, 2007 11:31 am Reply with quote

DELETED

 
DELETED
158010.  Tue Mar 20, 2007 1:27 pm Reply with quote

DELETED

 

Page 1 of 1

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group