Author is inclosing a copy of comments on Colouris's paper. He regrets that the publication of Lucas and Walk's paper on definition of PL/1 is deferred.

The author hopes that by now Coulouris has sent a revised version of his paper to the addressee. The author will leave it to the addressee to decide whether to publish it or not.

The letter has six topics, in particular, the author agrees that McGee's paper is an excellent one, that it's necessary to help to the Goodman's Found, but he suggests to donate half the royalties for three years. He asks about a final decision on Colouris's paper.

Reply to the letter of 15th September is delayed because of the author's moving from Manchester to Essex. The author discusses the results of contacts with potential authors, asks what the position is about the contribution of G. Colouris.

The author decided to include the Coulouris' paper in Volume 6 of the Annual Review because the paper needs the revision. Comments on this paper are attached. The author agrees with the addressee and Ershov that they will not accept papers outside their area.

It is a "formal letter" of the acceptance of Coulouris' paper for Volume 6 of the Annual Review.

C.Shaw is enclosing a copy of a paper by E.Kindler and asks A.Ershov to send his comments on this paper to Mr. Inada as a responsible editor for this contribution. The author is enrolling A.Ershov as a member of SIGPLAN and suggests him to pay the $6 dues when he renews his ACM membership.

The author thanks for accepting his contribution for Volume 6 and sends his final revised paper.

The author trusts that the final draft of his paper has been received by addressee.

The author says that the addressee's paper has been sent to the publisher (Pergamon Press) and soon the addressee should be receiving page proofs.

The author answers to questions from addressee's letter of 10 December. He informs on the schedule for Volume 6. The addressee has asked to prepare a preface for the hard bound Volume 6.

C.Shaw sends four papers by W.H.Burge to all the editors and asks their opinions about considering any of the four papers for publication in ARAP. He informs on completion of the editorial work for Volume 6. He raises perplexing questions about publisher and Volume 7.

The fifth volume of Annuel Review has been published. The volume is a handsome one and seems to be very well printed. The authors have sent to Pergamon much of the contents of the next volume. They are still dissatisfied by the paucity of contributions from outside the English-speaking community.

Before volume 6 to be issued shortly the authors review accomplishments and plans for the future. In particular, they are disappointed by the very small number of contributions from outside the United States. In this connection the following editors are noted: Floyd, Brooker, Bolliet, Ershov and Inada.