N.B.—Opinions expressed are those of our correspondents and Motor Sport does not necessarily associate itself with them.—Ed.
Last Words on the Lottery Grand Prix
From Cte. Dott. Ing. G. Lurani Cernuschi.
I was most interested in reading in the September issue you article about the 1933 Lottery Grand Prix of Tripoli.
Having known every detail of this race, even behind the scenes, I am in the position to give you my “true” opinion on it.
I have also contacted Mr. Canestrini (who was then the “man in between” in the agreement) and he has confirmed every detail of the “affair”.
In 1933, the Tripoli GP was endowed with big prizes (for that time) and with very large prizes for the Lottery, that for the first time was organised on the lines of the Irish Sweepstake, as you rightly say.
Every eligible driver looked for a car in which to try to compete in this very “rich” race (also for the good minimum starting money guaranteed to all drivers invited). The field was heterogeneous enough, and Al a Romeo eight-cylinder sports cars also competed (with wings and lamps removed of course).
The owners of the tickets of Nuvolari, Varzi and Borzacchini contacted these drivers, knowing that a probable winner would be one of these three (Campari’s and Birkin’s Maseratis not having much credit). The lucky owners wanted in fact to come to some sort of arrangement with the drivers. This was reached in a formal contract, drafted and signed in front of a Notary, and Mr. Canestrini, the well-known journalist, arranged the terms. It was a sort of pool in which the interest of these three drivers and those of the three ticket holders were melted together.
But there was no arrangement whatsoever for a “fix” of the results of the race itself. Obviously it was in the three drivers’ interest to finish the race and possibly to win it. The order was of no importance.
When in Tripoli, other drivers, like Campari and Gazzabini, wanted to “get on the band wagon”, but as they had not contacted their “owners”, their proposal was rejected.
Campari then planned with Birkin to try to win the race in any case, and the burly Maserati driver was surely rather angry with the “three brothers”. Gazzabini was no serious competitor even if he threatened the three “pool” drivers with futile menaces.
In the Grand Prix itself, Tim Birkin (a great friend of mine and MG team partner) drove a great race and also Campari were in the lead, but both were delayed and, as expected, Nuvolari and Varzi were ready to fight for the finish. This they surely did (also being at the wheels of cars of rival makes) when Canestrini signalled them to do so at the Taguira corner.
Varzi, a great strategist who out-foxed Nuvolari also in the Monte Carlo Grand Prix and Moll in the 1934 Tripoli GP, used the same “slipstream” systems now so popular and then so unknown, and won the race. Borzacchini retired, but being “in the plot”, also became a “millionaire” (in liras, which were then more valuable than today!), and his happiness was a pleasure to witness. Both Campari and Borzacchini died in the same Monza tragedy in September, only four months later.
The Tripoli 1933 “plot” did not infringe on an law (the Notary was to that) and surely did not alter in any way the Grand Prix race even if the “spoils” were divided in a much different way than the one supposed. But the sport was safe and racing surely straight and honest. For the 1934 Lottery Tripoli GP the drawing system was revised. Also at the present time the same system is used in the Lottery GP in Monza.
Congratulations for your magazine that, getting older, I appreciate more and more, as a connoisseur sips a great vintage wine!
Milan. Johnny Lurani.
I think I can give the answer to the question what really happened at the 1933 Tripoli Grand Prix. In the excellent book “Uomini e Motori”, by G. Canestrini, a leading Italian motor-scribe, appears an extensive report on the race and the plot between Nuvolari, Varzi and Borzacchini. Campari was never involved, as may be seen from the following translation:
“The proceeds of the lottery exceeded 15,000,000 lires, of which about 1,200,000 went to the AC of Tripolis for the organisation of the race, while about 6,000,000 lires were destined for the three holders of the tickets coupled to the first three finishers and about 550,000 lires were added to the prizes for the drivers. At a meeting assembling Borzacchini, Nuvolari, Varzi and some of their friends, the owners of the lucky tickets were also present with their lawyers. President of the meeting was G. Canestrini (the author). At first, the negotiations were not very difficult because the owners of the tickets were willing to share the money with the three drivers. A formal agreement was deposited at a bank. Next morning the agreement was published more or less exactly in the leading newspapers. Arriving at Tripoli, the three drivers were greeted by the rather alarmed “colleagues”, most of whom reacted rather unpleasantly, even threatening to sabotage the race. Varzi took a decidedly negative attitude to these threats, saying ‘do whatever you like, I drive my own race’. Borzacchini hid himself behind Nuvolari, who seemed to be impressed by the unfriendly attitude of the others and promised to play 50/50. When asked by Varzi how he could make such a promise Nuvolari replied: ‘It’s quite simple, it is better to share something with the others than to share nothing at all’. Other drivers too tried to make arrangements with the owners of ‘their’ tickets but in vain. The drivers with really fast cars such as Campari, Birkin and Fagioli increased their efforts during practice firmly decided to beat the coalition. Campari, that wily fox, counted on the rivalry between Varzi and Nuvolari, being convinced that even the big money at stake could not make them forget their feud. The morning of the race, Varzi came to my room at the hotel, saying: ‘With Nuvolari in the race the result is always in doubt, especially when millions of lires are involved’. Together we went to Nuvolari’s room, where we found him already fully dressed for the race. I told Nuvolari of Varzi’s worries and underlined that the race would be far from easy for both of them with such competitors as Campari, Birkin and Fagioli. Nuvolari seemed to agree and proposed to toss with Varzi to decide who would be the winner. Varzi agreed. No matter who would win, Varzi or Nuvolari, the agreement with the owners of the tickets would be respected, with the advantage that a ‘family’ fight resulting in the retirement of both was avoided. As far as Borzacchini was concerned, he would undoubtedly agree with Nuvolari’s proposal. Varzi won the toss, so he would be the winner.
“At the circuit I installed myself in a corner some two kilometres before the finish. Varzi was not altogether certain that Nuvolari would respect the agreement and insisted that I would ask Nuvolari not to display his usual fireworks but to save his car and make sure of finishing. Immediately after the start of the race everything went contrary to expectations. Birkin in his Maserati headed the field, followed by Nuvolari, Campari, Varzi, Fagioli, Borzacchini and Biondetti. Everyone seemed to work together, firmly decided to beat the ‘Three Musketeers’, forcing them to stress their cars to such an extent that a withdrawal was inevitable. During the first laps speeds were very high, about 172 k.p.h. On the fourth lap a very angry Campari overtook Nuvolari and Birkin, while Borzacchini had already retried on the second lap with a broken gearbox. Varzi, with his Bugatti running on seven cylinders only, was outpaced by the leaders. After five laps Campari had a 9-sec. lead over Birkin, who was followed at 5 sec. by Nuvolari, whereas Varzi followed at 57 sec. everyone expected Varzi to stop at his pits to change the faulty plug but he knew that the Bugatti mechanics had overfilled the sump and that, once the oil level had dropped, his Bugatti would run on its usual eight cylinders. He had a further surprise in sort for Nuvolari and Birkin. Whereas both would have to refuel, Varzi had fitted a spare fuel tank, enabling him to make a non-stop run. In the meantime Nuvolari, who was following Campari, noticed that the latter’s car was getting tired, and, indeed on the 14th lap, after a stop at his pits, Campari retired with an oil tank that had worked loose. When Birkin made a top to refuel, Varzi passed him, his car now running on all eight cylinders. At last he could launch his attack on Nuvolari. On the 20th lap, at two-thirds of the race, Nuvolari led Varzi by 18sec. Some laps later, when Nuvolari came in to refuel, Varzi took over the lead and at once reduced his speed, not willing to take any risk and knowing that either he or Nuvolari would win, and, after all, this was agreed. But, as was easy to foresee, the agreement did not work. Switching over to his spare fuel tank, he found that the switch did not work, so he prepared for a stop at the pits. To his immense relief the switch worked at last. By now there were only two laps to go and Nuvolari, thinking that Varzi was in trouble, overtook him. Seeing the cars go by side by side I knew that the agreement no longer worked. On the penultimate lap they were shouting and gesticulating at each other and I signalled them to reduce speed, but to no avail. The end of the race was told to me by Varzi himself. ‘On the finishing straight I was level with Nuvolari and I knew that our cars were equally fast. Therefore I stayed in his slipstream until I could see the finish, then swept to the left and could just overtake him.’
“Varzi arrived, in fact, a car’s length in front of Nuvolari. Birkin finished third at less than 2 min.”
I hope the above has thrown some light in this matter, especially as it comes from someone actually present at the races and closely connected with the “agreement”.
Amsterdam J. F. Cohen.
[This correspondence is now closed but the Editor is flattered by the interest so many readers have shown and thanks them for their many letters.–Ed.]
* * *
“A Quick Look At Fiat”
With reference to the above in your October 1969 issue of Motor Sport, you may be interested to know that the ingenious method of tappet adjustment referred to as Lampredi’s used on the Fiat overhead camshaft engine, was used on the MV Agusta four-cylinder motorcycle engine from the early fifties up until at least 1961 when I retired from motorcycle racing.
Watkins Glen, USA. John Surtees.
In your feature on Fiats in the October issue of Motor Sport you describe the ingenious way in which the tappets can be adjusted without removing the camshafts, a scheme that must “be the envy of all other designers of rockerless o.h.c. engines”.
The designer who produced the British Salmson won’t feel very envious because this feature was incorporated in all the car engines that came out of the Raynes Park factory of British Salmson Aero Engines, starting in 1934! The French Salmsons from about this date until the firm closed down in the early 1950s had the same layout.
The Salmson Scheme is perhaps better in so far that, to adjust the clearances, a hardened steel pad is lifted, inexpensive shims added or removed and the pad replaced on top of them. It looks, from the diagram on page 1080 of Motor Sport, as though the whole pad must be changed in the Fiat design. The Salmson tappet pad was hollowed and filled with aluminium with the object of reducing noise.
Peter Perry, Hon. Sec.,
Aldershot. British Salmson Owners’ Club.
* * *
A Car One Person Wants!
With reference to “The car that nobody wants”, I too have a car which falls in this category, namely a 1946 Humber Pullman seven-passenger limousine. Since saving this lovable hulk from our local breaker earlier this year I have tried several times to sell her, without success! The car has a 4-litre engine, averages 14 m.p.g. round town, 17 m.p.g. on distance runs. Extras include winged lady mascot (very busty!), rim-bellishers, twin spots, screen washers, wind-open wind-screen, three heaters, period roof rack, reversing lamp, rear blind, two cigar-lighters, etc., plus Thrupp & Maberly coachwork.
However, since the Booker Rally thoughts of selling the Humber have been put aside. I went as a spectator and somehow ended up as a competitor! Before I could utter a protest, we were told to join the parade of vehicles and were duly presented with your Booker rally plaque! I did feel a bit guilty at the time amongst all those finer machines, but nobody seemed to notice, not even yourself! [Yes!–Ed.]
I would like to add my thanks to the people who organised the rally for a most enjoyable outing for my family and myself. Also for restoring my faith in my enormous Humber. I am also overhauling a Humber Vogue.
Windsor. P. W. Hill.
* * *
A Triumph TR Enthusiast
During the past year I have covered a distance of 12,000 miles in a 1959 Triumph TR3A, which replaced my previous well thrashed 1958 VW. As well as being used very day of the week as transport to and from work, the TR has been used most weekends is some form of motoring sport, namely driving tests, rallies, hill-climbs, sprints, and practice days, under which conditions the car has performed with commendable reliability. The only attention required so far has been engine (the old piston rings had broken up, due mainly I am sure to consistent gross over-revving, which indicates that the red line at 5,000 is meant to be observed), a complete new clutch assembly (the old one wasn’t bad, but I have always considered a good clutch a worthwhile investment), and new rear springs, this work being done by myself.
The trouble is that I seem to be the only person who has any faith in the car. Whenever I enter the car for an event, without fail at least one uncomplimentary remark will be passed, usually of the form, “That’s a real handful you’ve got there”, or “You’re a brave man entering that thing”.
Why is this then? I can’t say I’ve had a great deal of success with the car, but I have gained three class wins in driving tests, and a third in class at a recent very wet National hill-climb, when I beat a Porsche and an Elan. It is completely standard, the rear shockers are u/s, because so far new ones have proved unobtainable, and I run it on Cinturato tyres on the front, and Michelin ZX on the rear.
As long as a firm grip is kept on the steering wheel, and an eye on the revs., I don’t see why a TR should give anyone any trouble. Furthermore, at a purchase price of £275, I feel it has been a reasonably cheap way of getting 100 m.p.h. performance, and a great deal of fun. So I admit to being rather mystified as to the reason why the TR is so unloved among spectators and fellow competitors alike. Perhaps someone can provide an explanation.
Incidentally, I expect my next car to be one of three: either a Healey 3000, a Sunbeam Tiger, or another TR.
Edinburgh. Douglas N. Thomson.
* * *
That Road-Test Citroen 2 C.V.
I was interested to read your reference to my 2 C.V. Citroën in your excellent report of its sophisticated successor, the Dyane 6. I am pleased to say that SPP979 is still running well after 16 years’ hard use. The speedometer was u/s when I bought the car, but I believe that it must have done 200,000 miles by now. The engine is still completely original apart from new piston rings fitted during a check over, and a main bearing that was changed “in case it got worse”. With only 9 b.h.p. when new, the performance is still measured by a calendar rather than a stopwatch, but oil use is nil, and petrol consumption on local running, which almost precludes top gear as this is an overdrive ratio (The Austin Maxi brought out this as a new idea, I believe!) is usually over 50 m.p.g.
Incidentally, it was as a Light 15 owner that I first drove the works demonstration 2 C.V. in 1954 and decided to buy one! . . . sometime. Then years later I bought one, and then learned that it was the identical car.
It is now off the road awaiting refurbishing—and will then be offered to any Motor Museum who is interested. It is, after all, the oldest English-built 2 C.V. (No. 33) as well as being the Motor Sport road test car!
The links with 2 C.V. have been retained, as apart from having several in the garden, the Ami 6 that replaced SPP as a shopping car has the registration number CV2.
I look forward to bringing them both to the Hants and Berks MC meeting next year, although this might involve towing an unlicensed and uninsured vehicle on the road, which I am advised by local and other police is NOT illegal unless the rope breaks. Perhaps one of your readers could clarify this for certain?
Wokingham. C. David Conway.
* * *
Referring to Mr. Brian Morgan’s comments on the Lamborghini 400 GT 2+2, I wonder whether the defects he found in the electrical wiring and heating was due to the car being converted from left-hand drive to right-hand drive. If not, I must say I am very surprised that the standard should have fallen off so much since my 400GT two-seater.
I agree with the headlamps which were awful before modification, as was the original heating and ventilation (mine was the first Lamborghini sold and is 1964 with the 400 engine fitted subsequently and the ventilation modified in 1966).
I still have the car, which has now done 33,000 miles and is a very fine advertisement for Lamborghini.
Anybody who wants a full four-seater car should certainly consider the Lamborghini Espada, which apart from really holding four people and lots of luggage, has refrigeration, ventilation and heating of the highest order.
Codicote. C. R. A. Grant,
Barnet Instruments Limited.
* * *
A British Drive For “Bluebird”?
I was most disturbed to read in the Daily Telegraph that Donald Campbell’s car, “Bluebird”, is to be prepared for another attempt on the World Land Speed Record, this time in America, with an American, Robert Summers, at the wheel.
This must surely be contrary to all that Campbell lived (and died) for. He spend the greater part of this lifetime securing for Britain both the World Water, and the World Land Speed Records with a determined patriotism which few men could equal.
Leo Villa, his former mechanic, is quoted as saying that the project will cost about £50,000. Surely this sum could be raised in Britain, and a British driver engaged to make the attempt. (Didn’t Innes Ireland indicate his interest in continuing Campbell’s work at the time of Campbell’s death?)
To many people it was an insult that Donald Campbell’s services to his country were never rewarded with a knighthood, but please don’t add injury to insult by allowing an American to steal Campbell’s glory.
West Didsbury. A. J. Hurdley.
* * *
Your recent correspondence on the subject on the Jaguar 4.2 unit has interested me greatly and it I may I should like to add my own comments.
I have owned during the past few years the three production versions of the XK engine, in the form of a 3.4 Mk. II, 3.8. ‘S’-type, and just now what the marketing pundits of British Leyland insist on calling a 4.2 Daimler Sovereign, which is nevertheless referred to by my friends and family as “The Jaguar”.
It is my definite impression that, as road-going versions of what is by derivation and design a racing engine, they can be rated for excellence in exactly that order, which the 4.2 quite definitely the thin end of the wedge and bottom of the list.
I purchased my present car, the 4.2, and specified almost every sensible optional extra including air-conditioning and a gas-flowed cylinder head, in anticipation of its being the culmination of unified and tested design before Jaguar embarked on an entirely new range of cars—the XJ6.
Unfortunately, I find myself pining for what the XK engine has come to mean to me: reasonable flexibility at low engine speeds: that fascinating “bite” that suddenly comes in with a mean sounding howl at about 3,500/3,750 r.p.m., plus complete willingness to rush up to 5,500 r.p.m. in any gear.
The 4.2, in a phrase, seems to have “lost its pedigree”. A fact surely endorsed by its near complete exclusion from any form of Jaguar currently being raced. I believe that the 3.8 version is almost invariably fitted on the grounds that the 4.2 “won’t rev.”.
It seems that in an effort to please elderly gentlemen who enjoy pottering along at 15 m.p.h. in top (“isn’t is smooth and flexible?”) Jaguar has lost sight of the exciting concept which for years has given them their World appeal.
No doubt the long-awaited V8 and V12 will bring back the appeal, as one feels sure that the gentlemen at Brown’s Lane are nobody’s fools; but let’s have no argument about the present 4.2. It is strained at anything over 4,500 r.p.m. Fuel consumption deserves an “X” certificate. But at least one can finally say that Jaguar has solved the awful overheating which persistently occurred until the advent of the current cross-flow radiator. What a great joy to sit in traffic jam in the middle of say, Madrid, cooled by my air-conditioning and that temperature gauge standing rock steady at its correct position!
Finally I should like to give myself away a little as a member of the “They-don’t-make-‘em-like-they-used-to” brigade, by saying that I also preferred the old, slow but absolutely smooth as silk, gearbox fitted to early Mk. IIs to the present “notch-box” Jaguar gearbox. One had to count 1.2.3 before sliding the gears in but what a beautifully engineered and precision feel it had.
Beautiful car all—but let’s hurry up and buy with reverence the XK and get on with that V12. . . . A Jaguar V12, just think of it!
Pinner. Nigel A. Stone.
* * *
Prices of Model Cars
First, may I say how much I enjoyed your very objective article on the Super Scale “Blower” Bentley in the September edition. However, I feel that your readers should be put it straight on one important point and that is the price. The £250 for the “Blower” Bentley includes purchase tax, whereas we are informed that the new price for the Crabbe Bugatti (in kit form) does not include purchase tax. Therefore the price differential is far greater than the £150 indicated in the article.
In fact £450 plus purchase tax at 36 2/3% under Group 20, £165 19s. 5d., brings the total cost of the Bugatti to £615 19s. 5d.—a differential of £364 19s. 5d.—a far cry from £150.
Regarding the race, no doubt we will be getting together at some time in the future, and I will be sure that you are invited.
Burton-on-Trent. D. Meynell,
Meynell Phillips & Co. Ltd.
* * *
A Frog Enthusiast
I am always delighted to hear praises sung of Mk. I Sprites as in two letters in the September issue. In February I abandoned a very tired Mini for, what I and my fanatical friends considered to be, a perfect “frog”.
It was rolled at some stage it its career, but this does not seem to have affected it in any way. Its engine is reliable and petrol consumption pretty average at about 36 m.p.g.—better than the Mini anyway! It is in very good condition, but the exhaust pipe has been lost once and appears to be giving up the ghost again: a point I noted with amusement in the letter from D. E. Stembridge.
I covet my Sprite and its frog eyes and fail to see why some people prefer the Ashley or Monza bonnets when it is possible to get original bonnets in fibre-glass. I would only change my “frog” for Healey 3000, but not for a few year when I hope I may be able to afford the big brother of this excellent make of car.
Thame. Alexandra Lunn.
* * *
How Long Do Koni Shock-Absorbers Last?
For many years I have been an ardent user of Koni shock absorbers and have fitted them to almost every car I have owned since about 1959. In the last two years, however, I have noticed a marked dropping-off in length of life, i.e., my last 3.8. Jaguar ran two years on a set (31,000). My present 3.8 Jaguar has used up two sets (34,000 miles). My wife’s first Volvo ran three years on a set (27,000 miles). Her present Volvo is having them changed at 11,500 miles.
Have I just been unlucky or have Koni decided to “design in” a shorter life?
London, N.W.6. W. J. May.
* * *
Shopping For An Alvis?
I have read with interest your series “Shopping for a Rolls and Bentley” and recently the article concerning the post-war Daimler coupé. I am a firm believer that quality cars built in the first ten years following the war can represent very fine value nowadays. Such cars as Daimler, Armstrong Siddeley and Alvis, etc., can be purchased for under £400 compared with much higher figures asked, and we assume obtained, for the Derby and Crewe-built cars. Up until about 1954 with the advent of the totally enclosed body, I personally feel that quality workmanship was to be found in a number of cars. My previous car to the one I now own was a 1953 MG TD. Compared to the MG-A produced only a couple of years later the TD was way ahead for workmanship. My present car, a 1953 3-litre TC21 Alvis, was purchased from its original owner some nine months ago. A few minor jobs have been done, including fitting new carpets, interior trim, etc. the leather seats were renovated by Connollys, a service I would recommend to anyone. The results were most satisfying. Slight “touching up” was done to the bodywork. Two new silencer boxes were fitted. When two of the Michelin “X” tyres fitted needed replacing I was advised to change the whole set to cross-plys. This I did and the whole car is transformed. Gone are a lot of the body rattles and the car is about an inch higher on the road.
When I first purchased the car I had expected spares to be somewhat difficult to obtain. This was definitely not so. I have nothing but thanks and praise to Messrs. Red Triangle Services of Kenilworth, who have been able to supply all I have required and have been exceedingly helpful.
The Alvis was originally purchased when I decided (the wife decided!) that I could not afford a Bentley which I would have preferred. However, now, after nine months of ownership, I feel that a Bentley would not have been able to offer any more than the Alvis, and would have in fact cost several hundred pounds more to purchase and to run. The point is that for the less affluent, quality motoring is still not beyond reach.
Hollinwood. Philip T. Edbrook.
* * *
Faithful Service From A 1930 Rolls-Royce
Living in this far corner, I find that Motor Sport reaches me somewhat belatedly. As a result I have just realised that you have been running a series of articles on pre-war cars costing less than £650.
I went over to the U.K. in 1964 for a working holiday. In the October of 1965 I purchased a 1930 20/25 Rolls-Royce hearse, chassis No. GLR 51. When purchased the vehicle was licenced and running, the only apparent mechanical fault being a slight knock from No. 5 gudgeon pin. Purchase price at this time was £125. Upon obtaining the vehicle I set off on a series of what can only be termed “drive and see what falls off”–type trips. Fortunately nothing did. Some 3,000-miles were covered in this manner, and this is the vehicle that caused you to remark in your January 1967 issue that after all it was the Vintage SPORTS Car Club.
In the winter of 1965/66 I removed the vehicle from service for two months and gave the engine a complete overhaul, replacing anything that was necessary. The total cost came to £34. The brakes were relined, the rear compartment converted to a caravan with roller blinds, stove, sink, lights and sleeping accommodation for two.
In May 1968 we left the U.K. for an overland trip to Australia. Unfortunately we only got as far as Dover, where we had the misfortune to break a half-shaft, in the ferry compound of all places. After a day’s diligent search a replacement was found at Adams and Oliver for £25, a round trip of some 500 miles by train, bus and borrowed car. With the able assistance of Mr. Derek Randal (a well-known collector of R.-R.s in Bucks.) the part was transported to Dover and bolted into place.
We finally left two days later than planned. I might had that this is the only time that “Matilda”—as she was named—has let me down due to mechanical failure. There then followed a six months’ trip through, across and around Europe and Asia, finally terminating in Bombay. She was then shipped to Fremantle, Western Australia, taking-in in all some 30 countries.
Apart from the half-shaft problem the only trouble experienced was with tyres, tractor tyres being forced into service for 200 very slow miles. We were very ably assisted out of this difficulty by Dunlop, who flew four new tyres out to Ankara in Turkey very quickly, for which I am much in their debt.
Whilst I resided in the U.K. the Rolls-Royce was used for everyday transport and together we have travelled some 50,000 miles, for a complete outlay (including shipping, but excluding tyres) of £550. This I think proves, even in this day and age, that vintage motoring can be had for a reasonable cost if one is not too fussy.
I may add that the vehicle is still licensed, although the bodywork understandably is not quite all it might be. On the coldest mornings it will still start straight away, which must mean something after the fuel which has been poured into her, i.e., everything from racing fuels to what I am sure was paraffin in India. But, still, she doesn’t complain, and is still every inch a lady.
South Perth, W. Australia. Peter J. Hitchin.