Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
There are two substantial defects which run through these accounts. First, they fail
correctly to represent how and where the Royal Society Grant was actually spent.
Secondly, they take no explicit notice of the details of Newman's bid to the Royal
Society or his estimate of expected costs. Thus, the financial myth ignores the finan-
cial context. By January 1946, it had been made clear to Newman that while the
university approved of his plan to build a computer they were unwilling to provide
financial support. Writing to the Royal Society in support of his application on 28th
January 1946, Newman gave approximate financial projections, which included pro-
vision for £800 for the salary of an Engineer and £500 for two “half-time” mathema-
ticians. No detailed breakdown of costs is given for the construction of the machine
beyond noting that the total cost would be £10,000 over the first three years and
£20,000 over the first five years. There is no indication that the project was intended
to come to an end after the fifth year and in the light of other comments he makes it
seems reasonable to suppose Newman saw Manchester as staying at the forefront of
computing over the long term. Newman made no allowance for his own salary pre-
sumably because felt he could direct the project in the time he had available after his
departmental duties were complete. His managerial style, which as we have seen,
involved picking very capable lieutenants and giving them freedom to do their jobs
without unnecessary interference, would have made this a realistic expectation.
Whereas Newman had expected to spend £1300 during the first year of the project to
cover salaries he ended up needing only £500. In addition, approximately £300 was
spent on sending Rees to the Moore School lectures. Allowing another £50 for mis-
cellaneous spending, this would have brought the first year's actual expenditure up to
c.£850. TRE's contribution to the project represented a saving against estimates worth
some £500 for Kilburn's salary and a further £100 (approximately) in donated com-
ponents. It is difficult to place an firm cash value on the hardware TRE supplied as it
was mostly surplus stock which if it had appeared on the open market would have had
a serious effect on prices Consequently, it would almost certainly have been destroyed
if it had not been given to Manchester14. The department of Electro-Technics
contributed some test equipment which they built in-house and a quantity of small
consumables from their own stores. Additionally they provided infrastructure e.g.,
floor space, drawing office facilities, workshop facilities. In total we might nominally
value this contribution as being worth £150.15
During the first year of the project's life Newman spent around 63% of his esti-
mated budget. The difference between anticipated and actual spending was entirely the
result of Kilburn's salary being covered by TRE whose additional generosity in donat-
ing components had no further beneficial effect on Newman's first year projections
since he hadn't allowed for them in any case. There is no reason to believe that New-
man would not have covered Kilburn's wages had the TRE proved reluctant, since he
had allowed for such expenditure and had been granted the necessary funds. It is ex-
tremely unlikely that the Royal Society, or any other grant awarding body, would have
looked kindly on any attempt by Newman to pay Kilburn's salary when alternative
funding had unexpectedly appeared. In fact, it should be said that the Royal Society
showed great latitude in allowing the £20,000 originally intended for capital develop-
ment to be spent post hoc on a building. It is also worth mentioning that had the Royal
Society instead clawed back the capital grant, matching funds would have had to be
found from the budget supporting further computer development at Manchester. The
Search WWH ::
Custom Search