> You must have forgot to attach it. There is nothing written below your
> paragraph.
>
*****************
I'll try again
*****************
> Dear Mr Moseley,
>
> If your letter is selected for publication in either New Scientist's Letters
> to the Editor section or the magazine's website letters page, our lawyers
> will want to know what your association was regarding the Thorburn incident.
> You say that the tabloid press did its best to suppress the fact that the
> law was about to change,...that Mr Thorburn would have received at least one
> advice visit etc... and that he received one visit in which he was given 28
> days written warning. I need to know how you knew these things and how you
> knew about the fate of Mr Shrimpton.
>
> Best regards
>
> RICHARD FIFIELD
> Executive Editor New Scientist
>
> Your original message:
>
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 15 October 2000 01:15
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Metrication
>
>
> Name: Ian Moseley
> Address:
> 5 Benson Avenue
> London
> E6 3EE
> Country: UNITED KINGDOM
>
> It was unusual to see a pro-metric article in the UK press (Let them eat
> kilos! It's time to embrace metrification, says Michael LePage)
> even if it did use the dreadful word 'metrification'; (there's no 'if' in
> metrication!).
>
> Unfortunately, the article also seems to perpetuate the myth that Mr
> Thorburn (the recalcitrant greengrocer) had no warning of the action taken.
> Admittedly, in 1999, the tabloid press did their best to suppress the fact
> that the law was about to change, but there were articles and material
> distributed both nationally and locally which should have alerted people;
> and Mr Thorburn would have received at least one advice visit. in addition
> he received one visit on which he was given 28 days written warning that his
> scales were no longer 'fit for use for trade', one visit on which the
> official stamp was obliterated and he would have been warned that they could
> not be used any more, probably a visit to make a test purchase to see if the
> were still in use and, only after that were the scales seized.
>
> Readers might also be interested that to know that the legal opinion given
> by Mr Shrimpton (a junior barrister), claiming that the regulations were
> invalid, has been robustly dismissed by a QC hired by the LGA. According to
> this opinion, not only is the legislation correctly formed but also local
> Councils are under a duty to enforce it and cannot refuse to do so.
>
>
