otechnique 63, No. 7, 573583 [http://dx.doi.org/10.1680/geot.12.P.043] Brown, S. F. (2013).

Ge

otechnique The Golder Archive: further insights into the birth of Ge

S . F. B ROW N

Information and records presented in previous papers describing the creation and early life of otechnique have been augmented by documents recently discovered in archives created by the late Ge Hugh Golder, one of the journals founding fathers. Correspondence with members of the European geotechnical community and with Karl Terzaghi in the 1940s and 1950s presents some new insights otechnique and the characters involved, notably Hugh Golder himself. This paper into the birth of Ge summarises the principal information, and reproduces some of the interesting documents in the archive. It is presented within the context of earlier papers on the subject by the founding fathers of otechnique and by the author. Ge
KEYWORDS: historic review

BACKGROUND otechnique was celebrated in The 60th anniversary of Ge suitable style in 2008 with a special issue of the journal (Atkinson, 2008), a meeting for reminiscences, and a good dinner on 9 July at the Institution of Civil Engineers. Those otechwho are familiar with the birth and early days of Ge nique (Golder, 1969; Cooling et al., 1975; Brown, 1982, 2008) and with the personalities involved (Burland, 2008) will realise that the nature of the event would have been approved of by Silas Glossop, Hugh Golder, Alec Skempton, Leonard Cooling, Bill Ward and the rest, and particularly Karl Terzaghi. No sooner had the dust settled on these celebrations and the ink dried on the papers of the Diamond Jubilee edition otechnique (Atkinson, 2008) than a dossier of relevant of Ge documents and correspondence came to light on the other side of the world. In February 2010 Dr Laurie Richards a rock mechanics consultant, who worked with Golder Associates for 19 years came across a box of stuff he acquired from Hugh Golder and Harold Harding, mostly concerned otechnique. Richards contacted with the early days of Ge John Burland, who arranged, through the good ofces of Mike Chrimes, the ICE librarian and archivist, for the box to be lodged at Great George Street. The contents reveal otechnique and the further insights into the birth of Ge characters who made it happen. This note describes the information, and how it adds to and complements what was published earlier (Brown, 1982, 2008). THE STORY SO FAR Hugh Golder (Fig. 1), one of the founding fathers of otechnique, described its conception as resulting from no Ge mean orgasm (Golder, 1969), which occurred in 1946 at a nightclub, probably in Rotterdam (Brown, 2008), attended by Glossop, Golder and the Dutch engineer E. C. W. A. (Wim) Geuze. This took place during the famous post-war tour of continental soil mechanics laboratories described previously (Golder, 1969). Golders description of the evening bears repeating:

Fig. 1. Hugh Quentin Golder (19111990)

. . .we met Professor Geuze for the rst time. The Professor entertained us royally, apologising for the lack of Scotch whisky in his country at the time but explaining that Dutch gin (Jenever), although it tasted like turpentine at rst, had a mighty effect. He instanced the over-population of Holland as proof. Later in the evening at a night-club, the name of which is unimportant, the conversation turned to publications, where to publish, in what language, etc. In spite of the fact that one of Hollands gifts to civilisation, by that time, tasted like nectar, we were unanimous that Dutch was not the right language. . .. Then the conception, Why not publish our own journal?. . . enthusiasm burgeoned, much to the astonishment and chagrin of a dispirited Belgian chanteuse who was singing a tired song in an underpaid manner. Never before had two (obvious) Englishmen turned their backs on her in the middle of her act to enter into an animated discussion with a handsome (and by no means obvious) Dutchman. There followed a two-year gestation period. During the rst of these, the Geotechnical Society was formed as a mechanism for publishing the journal. According to Arthur Penman (private correspondence, 2007) this was done so that the journal could be posted at the newspaper rate. The initial members of the Society were Glossop, Cooling, Golder, Skempton and Ward in England, together with Geuze, JeanPierre Daxelhofer, Armin von Moos, Jacques Florentin, Edward de Beer and Robert Haefeli from the Continent. Pen 573

Manuscript received 27 March 2012; revised manuscript accepted 26 April 2012. Published online ahead of print 12 October 2012. Discussion on this paper closes on 1 November 2013, for further details see p. ii. University of Nottingham, UK.

574

BROWN Masters blessing was requested by his disciples for the new venture in the form of his acting as its patron. Terzaghis reply was very positive, with complimentary remarks about activity in various parts of Europe and in Egypt, and a postscript indicating that the Belgians only seemed to know what was going on in Belgium. Underlined by Golder in the letter is Terzaghis view that to nd an adequate market at least half of the contents would be devoted to observations on structures in the eld. He expresses strong support for the inclusion of papers on historical matters, since one of the functions of soil mechanics consists in picking up the thread where it was left in about otech1880 though on a higher plane. Current readers of Ge nique will appreciate the concept of a higher plane, but will reect that the eld observations have been hard to come by over the years. Amongst the Golder Archive collection is a set of 31 letters that constitute about 20% of the replies received in response to the circular letter, the original of which was dated July 1947 but which was sent out at various dates up to January 1948. The writers are shown in Table 1 and include some important names, both of individuals and of organisations. In addition to their ambitions to start a journal, the founders also had another less well known proposal, which they set out in the circular letter (Brown, 1982). The second aim of the society would be to hold a Conference once a year for a period of about a week at which interested engineers would meet and discuss subjects of specialised interest. This conference would be held in rotation in the various Western European capitals. Most of the letters expressed support for the venture, and promised to contribute the requested 1 subscription. However, the letter received from McLean of the Road Research Laboratory (RRL) was notably cool, particularly considering that he had been one of the European tour party in 1946 with Golder, Glossop and Ward that led to the idea of otechnique. He was not, however, present at the inventing Ge nightclub conception, which may have been the problem. His outspoken exchanges of correspondence with Golder in 1948 are reported below, following a description of the early Geotechnical Society meetings to which reference is made. By contrast to McLean, a very amusing, tongue-in-cheek exchange took place between Robert Wynne-Edwards, then the head of Costains and formerly with Mowlems, the owners of Soil Mechanics Ltd, where Glossop and Golder were employed. The head of Mowlems at the time was Sir George Burt, great-great nephew of the wife of the companys founder, John Mowlem. Wynne-Edwards wrote to Golder saying that he had read the circular letter in front of the re over the Christmas period, and that some obscure lines were revealed on the back by the heat. He asked whether Golder could throw any light on their meaning. The verse has been previously published by Golder (Cooling et al., 1975) but bears repeating here to put his reply in context. It ran as follows. Come Soil Mechanics, inc of dust, Come stabilize yourselves a crust Upon the thixotropic sand Surrounding us on either hand So that we can more safely glide From one side to the other side As is expedient; deviate In our opinions from the straight Triaxially or even more And still be reasonably sure No one will let us down, no one

portraits of all these pioneers have been presented by Burland (2008). The patrons were Terzaghi, T. K. Huizinga then Director of the Laboratory for Soil Mechanics (LGM) in Delft and Sir George Burt of Mowlems. A circular letter dated July 1947, reproduced by Brown (1982), seeking views and modest funding of one or two pounds per year if supportive, was widely circulated among the geotechnical community in western Europe. It was successful, and the otechnique was published in June 1948. This rst issue of Ge was followed by three further issues over the following 18 months to complete Volume 1. Management and publication of the journal passed to the Institution of Civil Engineers (ICE) in 1949, and since then it has grown from strength to strength over 63 years to date. CORRESPONDENCE In early 1947, Golder wrote to Karl Terzaghi (Fig. 2), asking whether he would be prepared to act as patron of the Geotechnical Society. This letter and Terzaghis positive response are reproduced in Figs 3 and 4. The securing of Terzaghis support was critical to the successful launch of otechnique. The English founding members were already Ge well acquainted with Terzaghi, having rst met him in 1938, when he was invited by Robert Wynne-Edwards, Mowlems site agent, to advise on the Chingford Dam failure. He was very critical of the design, as recounted by Goodman (1998), but the British learned fast, and lasting relationships were established. Following a description of his European tour, Golders letter includes some touches of his humorous and rather outspoken approach to life, indicating a low opinion of the Russians and a desire to be independent of the Americans. He explains that the launching of a new Western European Soil Mechanics Journal is to facilitate cooperation between workers on this continent. It followed long and vinous discussions with Glossop, Daxelhofer and Geuze. The

Fig. 2. Karl Terzaghi (18831963)

 OTECHNIQUE THE GOLDER ARCHIVE: FURTHER INSIGHTS INTO THE BIRTH OF GE

575

otechnique Fig. 3. Golders letter to Terzaghi seeking support for the launch of Ge

In Europe that is once thats done We can relax, for none can pay Dollars for truth from USA. Write to the suckers, form a clique Offer to publish once a week; Admire each greatly, dont despise The fellow travellers each supplies A pound if suitably impressed. And as a hallmark of the best Lets patronize the name of Terz To ll the coffers of the Burts.

Golder replied with some literature of his own. It will be recalled that he did later publish some slim volumes of verse, including one entitled Engineering Verse, which appeared in 1973 (Golder, 1973). His reply read as follows. At rhyming couplets we can play our part, And have no need to stimulate our art By warming sheets of paper at the re To confound you or any other lyre (We should explain in our immediate ire We rst wrote liar, then misspelt it lyre).

576

BROWN

Fig. 4. Terzaghis response to Golders enquiry (the annotations are Golders)

We cannot hope to make clear your allusions To us they seem to smack of the delusions Of one who will not see the wood for trees (Or being Christmas, praps you had DTs). We are no bogeys, spivs or Machiavellis, We are God-fearing, for we know that hell is A murky place of res and pimps and whores, Peopled by folk with unkind thoughts like yours. Unworthy you! To lash us with your Muse Impute to us such low commercial views, For though our roles Gilbertian, you should know

Our types Gilt sans the honoured name in tow; Our aim, although not high, its own reward is, To write and talk to friends and then Quo Vadis? To drink a glass of wine in Delft or Wien? No cause at all in this to raise your spleen. And our advice to you is for the nonce, Remember! Honi soit qui mal y pense. Wynne-Edwards served as President of ICE in 1964 1965, and was knighted during that year.

 OTECHNIQUE THE GOLDER ARCHIVE: FURTHER INSIGHTS INTO THE BIRTH OF GE

Table 1. Responders to the July 1947 letter Name D. J. McLean W. Fisher-Cassie P. G. H. Bowell G. Magnel N. S. Boulter R. M. Wynne-Edwards L. Casagrande W. L. Lowe-Brown M. Nachshen H. dum S. Serota H. Grace G. Cook W. Shepherd Bann A. H. Naylor G. M. Binnie H. Chatley R. Freeman R. L. Fitt J. R. Davidson W. K. Wallace F. Campus K. Olpinski I. G. Doran R. S. Colquhoun T. Brenner J. B. Blott G. Beskow A. E. Bretting W. Kjellman E. de Beer K. H. Roscoe C. F. Kollbrunner W. E. Doran Organisation Road Research Laboratory University of Durham Royal School of Mines University of Ghent University of Shefeld Costains Building Research Station Sir Malcolm McDonald Consultant Danish Geotechnical Society Costains Scott and Wilson University of Glasgow Port of London Queens University Belfast Binnie, Deacon and Gourley Freeman Fox Sir Alexander Gibb Metropolitan Water Board Railway Executive, London Midland Region University of Liege Roads & Runways (Engineers) Ltd Queens University Belfast Consultant Finnish State Railways Shell Swedish Highway Research Institute Danish Technical University Swedish Geotechnical Institute State Geotechnical Institute, Belgium University of Cambridge Consultant, Zu rich Great Ouse Catchment Board Comment Unsupportive

577

Poetically expressed suspicion of a Mowlems plot! Younger brother of Arthur, who worked at BRE 19461950 Must include geologists Soil mechanics subject index needed Society should be linked to International Society Support also from H. B. Sutherland, then in the USA, and W. Bannatyne Organisation needs to be further advanced before deciding Worked on the Mulberry Harbour following a career in China

Key player subsequently. Surprised that so many people specialised in the subject Replied from Kenya Annual meeting could be linked to International Road Congress Interested in collaboration with northern climates in America Must be linked to international organisation, particularly the journal Annual conference is too often Should be written exclusively in English. No reason for a French name. Wait for discussion of international journal at upcoming Conference Comments on the proposed title Keen on the idea of conferences as well as the journal 1 enclosed! Support also from N. A. Mowbray and M. Nixon

De Beer pointed out, in relation to the proposed name for the journal, that otechnique is rather new in French, and was The word Ge rst used in Switzerland and in Belgium, and only later in otechnologie in each case seems to be France itself. Ge wrong in French for this purpose. Thus the new periodical otechnique, La Revue Ge otechnique can be called La Ge otechnique. or La Revue de Ge T. K. Huizinga, of the Delft Soil Mechanics Laboratory, wrote to Terzaghi on 1 March 1948 concerning arrangements for the forthcoming Second International Conference. Terzaghis extensive reply, dated 8 March, contains the following comments on the international scene at that time. According to your letter no contacts have yet been established with Russia, the Balkan States, China and Panama. The Russian attitude has mot [most] likely something to do with the iron curtain. Regarding Panama and the Balkan States, it is doubtful whether there are any engineers in these countries who know something about Soil Mechanics. Poor China is in a desperate condition and has more serious worries than participation in an international congress. In response to rather bureaucratic-sounding proposals for setting up a central organisation with heavy duties such as the publication of a periodical, Terzaghi commends the alternative of strong national societies, with their representa-

tives liaising through the international organisation. He supports the approach in England: In this connection, I wish to call your attention to the efforts which are being made by Hugh Q. Golder and his associates in London to establish a pan-European unit, to otechnique. This appears be served by a periodical, La Ge to me as a worthwhile experiment which deserves wholehearted support; it requires a much less elaborate apparatus than an international organisation, and execution of the program is much easier because the participants are neighbours, at least geographically.

THE GEOTECHNICAL SOCIETY MEETINGS Armed with this generally encouraging feedback, the rst meeting of the Geotechnical Society was held on 18 February 1948 at the ICE. The handwritten minutes of this and of the second meeting, on 24 May 1948, are in the archive. So too are the typed minutes of a general meeting held on 29 April 1948, which was called to canvas opinion about the Societys plans, and of the third meeting, held the following year on 24 May. These meetings seem to constitute the formal record of the launch and production of the rst otechnique, which consisted of four issues over volume of Ge 1948 and 1949. ICE assumed responsibility for the journal thereafter, and the rst meeting of its Editorial Panel was held on 30 November 1949 under the chairmanship of W. K. Wallace.

578

BROWN was, strangely, no mention of the title in the proposed Society rules. Much of the discussion at this meeting concerned the proposed interactions between the society and ICE. The otechnique founders were clearly concerned to ensure that Ge their idea for a new journal should not cut across what was being done to foster broader international dialogue on soil mechanics under the umbrella of the International Society. Many of the ideas that were aired sounded like the pioneering work that led to establishment of the working relationship, ultimately enjoyed for so many years by the British Geotechnical Society (BGS) with ICE and, by association, with the International Society. This was achieved through its British National Committee, established in 1947, a year before the Geotechnical Society. The forerunner of BGS was actually the British Section of the International Society for Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering (Cooling et al., 1975) established in March 1949, this coinciding with ICE otechnique. also assuming responsibility for Ge In fact, although cordial relationships always existed be otechnique Advisory Panel, it was not tween BGS and the Ge until 1974 that the BGS committee formally had a representative on the Panel. It is clear from the debate, that most of those attending, while anxious to ensure close links with ICE and for them to deal with the administration, nonetheless wanted a degree of independence for this new Society, which is very much how BGS and its successor BGA have operated. The proposed rules of the Society are reproduced in Appendix 1, from which it will be seen that much of the detail concerned the election of members and their exclusion (one black ball in six; Rule VIII). The management of the Society was proposed to be put into the hands of a committee, which was effectively what was already happening through the founder members. Rule XII stated that the chairman should be a member of the ICE Council. At the meeting, a proposal by Golder that Francis WentworthShields, a recent ICE President (19441945), should be approached to act on a permanent basis was carried, once it was established that W. K. Wallace did not wish to be elected. In the event, Wallace was appointed as the rst otechnique panel when it was set up by chairman of the Ge ICE the following year (1949), and no evidence has been seen to suggest that any other general meetings of the Geotechnical Society took place. Indeed, the only subsequent meetings appear to have been those of the founders (committee) on 24 May 1948 and 6 May 1949, principally to deal with editorial matters concerning the contents of the journal. OSullivan thought it commendable that, in Rule XI, the committee had considered the possibility of undesirable or subversive activities, which was a rather strong interpretation of the words conduct. . . harmful to the interests of the Society. D. J. McLean of the Road Research Laboratory kept up the critical attitude shown in his earlier correspondence with Golder. He was not keen either on the title of the society, since he thought the word geotechnical referred to special oprocesses, or on the proposal to call the journal La Ge technique. He also criticised the lack of detail on the Societys exact objectives, and the lack of clarity on the proposed relationship with ICE. He and Saurin thought that the term foundation engineering should feature in the Societys scope. Following the various discussion points and queries, Glossop revealed that he had been largely responsible for drafting the rules without any real knowledge of such matters, and had relied on his experience with similar organisations. In addition to the proposal relating to the future chairman, three others were carried by the meeting

The rst meeting This was attended by the ve founding UK members of the Society: Glossop, who chaired the meeting and was appointed treasurer, Golder, who was appointed secretary, Skempton, Cooling and Ward. Alex Bannister was in attendance representing the ICE secretary. Glossop reported that at least 150 people had agreed to provide support and contribute 1 per annum, and that this number might increase to 300, so the stage had been reached for the formation of a magazine on Geotechnology and related subjects. The costs involved were envisaged to be 80 to 90 per issue, and at two per year the nancial risk was not considered great, so it was agreed to publish the rst issue in the Spring. Cooling was anxious to ensure that the Society was closely linked to ICE, and it was noted that their activities should not conict with any International Organisation which might be set up at Rotterdam in June. Decisions were made for Golder to prepare a set of rules for the Society, and for thanks to be conveyed to Mrs Skempton for agreeing to design a cover for the magazine and advise on the typography. The reference to Rotterdam was to the upcoming Second International Conference, held in June 1948, the incidence of which had also been referred to in many of the letters received in response to the solicitations for support. General meeting This was held at ICE on 29 April 1948 under the chairmanship of W. K. Wallace, and was essentially called by the Geotechnical Societys founding members to discuss the draft rules, which ran to four and a half pages, numbered 22 in total, and had largely been written by Glossop rather than Golder. As is apparent from Golders correspondence with McLean reported below, only those who had agreed to support the journal and pay the necessary subscription were invited. The minutes of the February meeting were read by Golder and signed by Wallace. There is no record of how many people attended this general meeting, but, in addition to the Society members, about 12 people contributed to the discussion, although not all the names were recorded. Among the notable contributors were Rolt Hammond, T. P. OSullivan, Brendan Saurin, P. L. Capper, Harold Harding and Ivan Nixon. This was a distinguished group of individuals to have supporting the venture. Hammond, noted for his extensive writing on a variety of particular and general civil engineering subjects, was then working for the Chief Scientic Adviser to the Ministry of Works engaged on building research. OSullivan, who later formed the consultancy that carried his name and is now part of the WSP group, was at that time the Chief Engineer of Brian Colquhoun and Partners. Harding, later Sir Harold Harding (ICE President in 19631964), noted for his extensive and distinguished tunnelling work, was then a colleague of Glossop and Golder at Soil Mechanics Ltd. Capper, remembered for his joint authorship of the standard student text on soil mechanics with Fisher-Cassie, was a lecturer at University College London. Nixon worked in the Soil Mechanics Ltd laboratory, and made major contributions to soils testing over the years, while Saurin subsequently had a long and distinguished career with BP. Golder reported that the journal title had been xed as otechnique, and that it could not be altered for the La Ge rst issue, the printing of which was well advanced. However, it duly appeared without the French denite article (see Brown, 1982, where it is reproduced) at the insistence of Nancy Skempton on aesthetic grounds (Golder, 1969). There

 OTECHNIQUE THE GOLDER ARCHIVE: FURTHER INSIGHTS INTO THE BIRTH OF GE (a) that there should be an agreed form of afliation with ICE (b) that the proposed rules, in general, met with the approval of the meeting (c) that the managing editors should be Golder, Glossop, Skempton and Cooling, and that they should be approved by the ICE Council. Returning to Golders exchanges of letters with D. J. McLean of RRL, the latter wrote on 17 December 1947 saying that he had passed the circular letter on to his colleagues in the Soils Section (at RRL) and discussed the proposal with them. He conveyed their views in the following terms. We are all quite interested in the proposal but are a little surprised that it has been made independently of the International Conference and the Institution of Civil Engineers. . .. We are not quite sure that the society will serve a useful purpose. . .. With the excellent library facilities available at the Laboratory, we are, of course, well informed of work being undertaken on soil mechanics in other countries, and we have adequate facilities for publishing our work. In the circumstances we would like to withhold our decision regarding the projected society until we see how things develop at next years International Conference. Golder did not reply until 30 April 1948, which was the day after the general meeting discussed above. He wrote: I was pleased, though surprised, to see you at the meeting last night and take it that you have now reconsidered your earlier unfavourable decision and are willing to support the journal. I accordingly enclose six subscription forms. . . This was in spite of the fact that McLean had actually been rather critical of certain matters at the meeting. He replied to Golder on 10 May: Speaking quite personally, I am glad to see that you have invited the support of the Institution of Civil Engineers, as suggested in my letter of the 17th December, but the relationship between your society and the International Society still seems a little obscure. . . Golders reply by return of post on 11 May was classic Golder. He wrote: You are quite wrong about the link-up with the Civils being the result of your suggestion of December the 17th , as we did not invite the support of the Civils; they approached us in the rst place and offered help. Naturally, the relationship between our Society and the International Society is still a little obscure, since the latter does not yet exist. . .. I must point out that your participation in the Meeting on the 29th April was assumed by us to be a declaration of support, since this was a meeting of supporters and only those who had agreed to subscribe to the Journal were invited. Technically, therefore, unless you become a subscriber you were out of order in speaking at the Meeting and I am wondering now whether your remarks should be deleted from the Minutes. Golder went on to point out that McLean and his colleagues could attend any future meeting only after they had paid their subscriptions. He concluded: There is the further point that the rst number of the Journal will appear at the end of this month and will be sent to subscribers who have paid up; I can assure you that it will be worth the money. I am sure that after thinking this over you will be only too anxious to make your

579

decision now and persuade your colleagues also to send us their pounds. Notwithstanding this apparently difcult relationship, and the sceptical views of McLean, he did become a member of otechnique Advisory Panel six years later, in 1954, the Ge following the untimely death of Guthlac Wilson (Burland, 2008), who had been a member from the time ICE assumed responsibility for the journal in 1949. McLean served until 1965. With the disappearance of the name Scott Wilson from UK consultancy in January 2012, following its takeover by the American rm URS, it is worth recalling that the Wilson involved was indeed Guthlac. The second meeting This was held on 24 May 1948 with the same attendees as at the February meeting, except that Rolt Hammond was present, for reasons that are not apparent. From the tone of the minutes, it seems that the April meeting had been held as a public relations exercise and to help facilitate links with ICE. At this May meeting, Golder asked whether all those who had attended the April meeting should be considered as founder members of the Geotechnical Society. After discussion it was concluded that as no rules were passed at that meeting there was no reason to suppose that they were to be founder members. It was further stated that members of the Society should be those persons now present and the founder members abroad. This poses the question about the status of Rolt Hammond, who has never previously been recognised as a founder member, and is not mentioned in any later documents. There was no mention of the other proposals that emerged from the April meeting, so it seems that the founding members of the Society had decided to press on with publication of at least the rst two issues of the journal. No further reference was made to the extensive set of rules that Glossop had drafted for the Society. Most of the work was apparently carried out at Soil Mechanics Ltds ofces by Glossop and Golder with secretarial assistance (Ward, private correspondence, 1981). The meeting discussed the possibility of the British National Committee taking on the journal (Cooling), the inclusion of advertisements (Hammond) and approaching UNESCO, the Royal Society and other bodies for nancial support (Skempton). It was concluded that no additional nance was needed at that time, and Glossop proposed for the rst issue, Maximum size to be 64 pages, not too much maths, and a few illustrations. In the event it ran to 76 pages, and included several tricky equations in a paper by de Beer, which was written in French. Advertising did appear in the third and fourth issues. The meeting concluded with a list of possible papers for the second and subsequent issues. This included a request for Ralph Peck to encourage a paper from the USA. Peck had agreed to act as a regional editor in the USA through the good ofces of Karl Terzaghi, and a paper by one of his research students on raft foundations did appear in the fourth issue. Reviews The archive contains copies of some reviews for the rst (June 1948) edition. Economic Geology gave a good account of the content, which starts off with a thoughtful foreword by Karl Terzaghi and contains considerable geology. The new journal was said to show that there is a place for it among technical and scientic publications, and the review ends by stating that the volume should be of interest to

580

BROWN panel, despite his long and distinguished career. The general feel obtained from the early minutes after ICE assumed control was very much business as usual, with the ethos, appearance and content of the journal remaining unchanged.

geologists, engineering geologists, and construction engineers. The Mining Magazine drew its readers attention to the appearance of the rst number of a new journal, which was the ofcial organ of the Geotechnical Society. It contained mainly theoretical soil mechanics, but it was intended, in subsequent numbers, to preserve a balance between theoretical and practical engineering geology. A report in Engineering was entirely factual, and the Science Museum sent a rather grand acknowledgement. It stated: I am directed to inform you that the Minister of Education has much pleasure in accepting the publications set out herein which you have been so good as to present to the National Collections at the Science Museum Library. I am to convey to you his best thanks for the gift. I have the honour to be, Sir, Your obedient Servant, H Shaw. Director and Secretary. The founders would have been pleased with such elegant appreciation. The most enthusiastic and down-to-earth review was the informal one contained in a letter to Golder dated 18 June 1948 from Francis Wentworth-Shields, which ran: Read it on train and enjoyed it. Congratulate you and the team most heartily. It has real good stuff in it which is most attractively set out. The third meeting This was held a year later on 6 May 1949, shortly before the third issue was published. The four UK founders were present, but there is no mention in the minutes of Rolt Hammond or of Alex Bannister. Following a breakeven situation with the nances for 1948, they agreed to raise some advertising revenue that would allow them to continue to publish the journal for a further year. They were unenthusiastic at that stage about allowing the British National Committee to take it over. There was discussion about a conference that they had intended to run in July that year, and to which personal invitations had been extended to 17 engineers from around Europe. In view of the time factor, it was agreed to postpone it until Easter 1950. A letter from Banister at ICE was reported in which he had asked why the proposal for a conference had not been made to the British National Committee. Golder realised that there had been a misunderstanding, as theirs was intended to be purely a private conference with personal invitations and that there would not be more than a dozen or so taking part. The Conference on measurement of shear strength of soils in relation to practice held in June 1950 appears to have been the result. The menu from a dinner at that event was reproduced by Brown (2008), and this indicates an attendance of about 30. All the papers and discussion were otechnique issues of December 1950 and published in the Ge June 1951. The rst Ge otechnique Advisory Panel meeting No further meetings of the founders took place. They wrote to the British Section of the International Society on 30 June 1949 asking whether the Institution would take over otechnique. This proposal responsibility for publishing Ge was accepted in October, and the rst meeting of the Advisory Panel was held on 30 November 1949 under the chairmanship of W. K. Wallace. The names of the members were rather familiar: they were the same Geotechnical Society founders, but with the substitution of Guthlac Wilson for Bill Ward, who never subsequently served on the

OTHER CORRESPONDENCE WITH TERZAGHI In his letter to Huizinga dated 8 March 1948 and referred to above, Terzaghi got quite upset at the prospect, mistaken as it turned out, of invitations to the International Conference in Rotterdam not being sent to Germans and Austrians. He said, I can fully appreciate the feelings which governed your attitude towards the German application for admission to the conference, and he goes on to relate something of his wartime experiences at the hands of the Nazi regime. He then presents a strong philosophical statement as follows. I have worked among many nations and I know from personal experience that there are constructive and destructive elements in each one of them. In some periods of history the constructive ones have the upper hand and in others the destructive ones. Germany was temporarily dominated by the forces of darkness and pays now a terric price for it. If you fail to extend your helping hand to those who are willing and eager to make up by serving a common cause you accomplish the opposite of what your own interests call for. You antagonise the good elements in Germany and thus play into the hands of the bad ones. He ends by relating an incident that he witnessed in 1918 in Istanbul, which had then been occupied by allied troops. I was sitting in a small coffee house which was crowded with British and German soldiers and a group of Levantine civilians. One of the Levantines started to insult a group of German soldiers, because he felt that he could now do it without any risk. As an almost immediate reaction a British Tommy got up and silenced the Levantine by socking him in the jaw. Terzaghi went on to say: During the following decades . . . I have experienced touching manifestations of the affection and loyalty of my British friends. Yet I can assure you that none of them brought the British closer to my heart than the incident described above. It was Golder who conveyed to Terzaghi, in a letter dated 18 March 1948, the news he had received from Holland that Germans were in fact being invited to the conference, as the matter had been cleared by the Dutch government. However, they were unlikely to attend, as they had no foreign currency, but they were at liberty to submit papers. It was in this letter, too, that Terzaghi was thanked for suggesting Ralph Peck as the Regional Editor for the USA. The next set of correspondence between Golder and Terzaghi in the Archive dates from 1951 to 1953, and is concerned with social matters. A pleasant letter from Golder, dated 5 July 1951, read as follows. Although GEOTECHNIQUE is now published by the Institution of Civil Engineers, the Geotechnical Society still ecists [exists], though for what purpose other than an annual dinner club we have not yet decided. However, at the last meeting, which concluded over dinner in true geotechnical fashion, the founder members decided that they would like to send you a bound copy of the rst otechnique with their thanks for your volume of Ge assistance and support in the early stages of our venture. You would probably be interested to know that the handsome leather binding was done by Mrs. Skempton.

 OTECHNIQUE THE GOLDER ARCHIVE: FURTHER INSIGHTS INTO THE BIRTH OF GE The dinner held by the Geotechnical Society at the Good Intent restaurant in Chelsea on 24 July 1953 to celebrate Terzaghis 70th birthday, which was actually on 2 October, has passed into folklore. Glossop (Cooling et al., 1975) and Brown (2008) have previously referred to it. In the Golder Archive there is a copy of the letter sent to Terzaghi about the occasion and of the invitation sent out to the dozen or so people who were invited. Golder wrote: . . . we are arranging a small dinner party of engineers who are interested and active in the soil mechanics world. . . . It may perhaps be somewhat of a surprise to you to learn of the continued existence of this Society, but having successfully launched GEOTECHNIQUE and organised its adoption by a wealthy Foster Parent, and having also some small funds in hand, the Founder Members have decided that the existence of the Society provides a useful spur to larger, wealthier, older and more lethargic Institution when action is needed. The funds that were actually used for the dinner were reported by Glossop (Cooling et al., 1975) to have amounted to 79 5s 2d. The invitation list and sample invitation are reproduced in Fig. 5. These names were in addition to Golder and Glossop, who were, effectively, the hosts. Two of the other otechnique founders are listed (Cooling and Skempton), Ge but, curiously, Bill Wards name is missing. The guests were drawn from leading consultancies, and from Mowlems staff, together with well-known academics from Imperial College and Cambridge, and W. K. Wallace, whose support otechnique had been throughout the birth and delivery of Ge so important (Burland, 2008). The Good Intent restaurant in

581

Kings Road Chelsea was close to Soil Mechanics Ltds ofces, at that time in Old Church Street. The restaurant no longer exists, but had a splendid history, having originally been located in a charming building on Cheyne Walk. SUMMARY The archive of documents from the late Hugh Golder, donated in 2010 by Dr Laurie Richards to ICE, has provided some interesting additional background detail about the birth otechnique. Of particular interest is the correspondence of Ge that took place between Golder and Terzaghi securing the great mans support for the venture, as well as copies of other letters Terzaghi wrote concerning preparations for the Second International Conference in 1948, the incidence of owhich coincided with publication of the rst issue of Ge technique. The minutes of meetings held by the founders of the journal in 1948 and 1949 have also provided additional background, particularly when read in conjunction with those for a general meeting of the initial supporters of the concept. The impish character of Hugh Golder shines through much of the correspondence, and adds to the sense of fun but also of determination which he and his colleagues showed in establishing the leading international soil mechanics journal during a very difcult period of post-war austerity. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author is extremely grateful to Professor John Burland for drawing his attention to the discovery of the Golder Archive, and to Laurie Richards for unearthing it and recognising its signicance. Mike Chrimes, the Institution of Civil

Fig. 5. Invitation list for Terzaghis 70th birthday dinner

582

BROWN
arrears shall not be entitled to any of the privileges of Membership; and any Member whose Annual Subscriptions are two years in arrear shall be removed from the Society by the Committee. (XI) Any Member whose conduct is, in the opinion of the Committee, harmful to the interests of the Society may be removed from the Society by the Committee, by the vote of a majority of two thirds present at a meeting of the Committee, on the Agenda Paper of which the words Removal of a Member shall have appeared provided that no Member may be so removed, unless due notice has been sent to him of the intention of the Committee to proceed against him under this Rule, and of the nature of the charges made against him, and an opportunity has been afforded him of answering such charges, and of explaining his conduct to the satisfaction of the Committee. (XII)

Engineers archivist, agreed to the documents being housed at Great George Street, and his assistant, Carol Morgan, was extremely helpful in facilitating access to this and other documentation. The gures are reproduced by kind permission of Golder Associates.
APPENDIX 1. PROPOSED RULES FOR THE GEOTECHNICAL SOCIETY; APRIL 1948 GEOTECHNICAL SOCIETY RULES (I) The Society shall be called THE GEOTECHNICAL SOCIETY. (II) The objectives of the Society shall be to publish a Journal in French and English devoted to Engineering Geology, Soil Mechanics and related studies, and thus to promote international collaboration between workers in these subjects, and to organise regional Discussion Groups. The Society may also, at the discretion of the Committee, hold meetings for discussion of these subjects. (III) The Headquarters of the Society shall be in London. (IV) The Society shall consist of Founder Members, Honorary Members and Elected Members. (V) Members shall, subject to Rule (X), have the right of attending and voting at all meetings of the Society, of proposing candidates for admission as Elected Members of the Society, of serving, if elected, in any ofce of the Society, and of receiving the Journals issued during their membership. (VI) Every Candidate for admission as an Ordinary Member shall be proposed by two or more members, who shall sign a certicate of recommendation setting forth his or her name and place of residence. The proposer whose name stands rst upon the certicate shall certify to personal knowledge of the Candidate. (VII) Submission for election shall proceed as follows. The names of the Candidate and of his Proposer and Seconder shall be published in the next issue of the Journal following the receipt of the certicate by the Secretary. (VIII) The procedure for the election of Members shall be as follows; three months after the Candidates name has appeared in the Journal the Candidate will be assumed to be duly elected unless a demand for a ballot is made in writing to the Secretary. In such a case balloting papers will be sent to Members with the next issue of the Journal. One black ball in six shall exclude, but no ballot shall be valid unless twelve members have voted. (IX) The annual subscription shall be 1 and shall become due on the 1st of January in each year. (X) The Journal will not be sent to Members whose subscription is in arrears. Members whose annual subscription is twelve months in

The Management of the Society shall be vested in a Committee consisting of a Chairman, who shall be a Member of the Council of the Institution of Civil Engineers, a Secretary and Treasurer who shall be appointed by the Council of the Institution of Civil Engineers, four Managing Editors who shall be resident in England, and as many Regional Editors as the Committee shall consider desirable. The Editors shall be elected at a General Meeting of the Society and shall serve for four years. Retiring Members shall be eligible for re-election. (XIII) The Committee shall have power to ll any vacancies which may arise in the Committee until the next General Meeting of the Society. (XIV) At meetings of the Committee four members shall form a quorum. (XV) The property of the Society shall be vested in three Trustees who shall be appointed by the Council of the Institution of Civil Engineers. Of the Trustees thus appointed two shall be managing Trustees selected from the Members of the Society, and one a Custodian Trustee. The Custodian Trustee shall be the Public Trustee or a Bank, and any invested property of the Society shall stand in his or its name. (XVI) In the event of dissolution of the Society any property or effects (funded or otherwise) shall be disposed of by gift to such other societies or Institutions as may be decided by the vote of a Special General Meeting of the Society. (XVII) Minutes shall be kept of the meetings of the Committee, and the Minutes of each Meeting shall be read as the rst business of the next ensuing Meeting. (XVIII) The Accounts of the Society shall be made up to the 31st December in each year, and be audited by two members of the Society, not being members of the Committee who shall be appointed by the Secretary of the Institution of Civil Engineers, and an audited Financial Statement shall be published in the following number of the Journal. (XIX) Persons of eminence in the sciences associated with Geotechnology, or who have done some special service to the Society, may be recommended by the Committee for election as Honorary Members at a General Meeting, and shall, upon being elected, have full rights

 OTECHNIQUE THE GOLDER ARCHIVE: FURTHER INSIGHTS INTO THE BIRTH OF GE

and privileges of Membership. The number of Honorary Members shall not exceed twenty-ve. (XX) A copy of these Rules shall be sent to each Member on election. (XXI) No rule shall be altered except by a majority of the Members present and voting at a Special General Meeting convened for that purpose. (XXII) Any Library, Museum, Scientic Society, Public Institution or Industrial Organisation may, on application, be placed by the Committee on the list of Members of the Society, and shall on payment in advance of 1 per annum be entitled to the Journal of the Society, but shall not be entitled to any other rights or privileges.

583

REFERENCES
Atkinson, J. H. (ed.) (2008). The essence of geotechnical engineer otechnique. London, UK: Thomas Telford. ing: 60 years of Ge otechnique 19481980: Brown, S. F. (1982). The development of Ge otechnique 32, No. 2, 95110, http:// The rst 30 volumes. Ge dx.doi.org/10.1680/geot.1982.32.2.95. otechnique 19482008: more than just a Brown, S. F. (2008). Ge otechnique 58, No. 5, 315326, http://dx.doi.org/ journal. Ge 10.1680/geot.2008.58.5.315. otechnique. Ge otechnique Burland, J. B. (2008). The founders of Ge 58, No. 5, 327341, http://dx.doi.org/10.1680/geot.2008.58.5.327. Cooling, L. F., Skempton, A. W., Glossop, R. & Golder, H. Q. (1975). British Geotechnical Society Twenty-fth Anniversary otechnique 25, No. 4, 629656, http://dx.doi.org/ Report. Ge 10.1680/geot.1975.25.4.629. otechnique 19, No. 2, Golder, H. Q. (1969). Correspondence. Ge 313315, http://dx.doi.org/10.1680/geot.1969.19.2.313. Golder, H. Q. (1973). Engineering verse. London, UK: Hugh Q. Golder. Goodman, R. E. (1998). Karl Terzaghi: the engineer as artist. Reston, VA, USA: ASCE.