Dear John,

RE: ``The Hubble Diagram of Type Ia Supernovae as a Function of Host
Galaxy Morphology'', reference MC872.

Thank you for forwarding the referee's report on our paper. We have
responded with a revised version which I have ftp-ed to the MN FTP
site. Please note that we wish to submit this paper in electronic form
upon acceptance for publication, and that the paper has 4 colour
figures where we believe the use of colour is essential for the
paper. The revisions respond to the referee's comments as detailed
below.

>  1.- The last sentence of Section 7 ("conclusions") must be
>  rewritten. In particular : i)*the word "speculation" concerning the
>  work of Rowan-Robinson (2002) should be removed ; more , a critical
>  discussion of this work should be achieved in Section 6
>  ("discussion"). ii)*the use of the word "to demonstrate" concerning
>  the work of the authors is not appropiate;I rather suggest
>  something like "to show", for instance .

We have redrafted the final paragraph of Section 7 and expanded the
discussion of Rowan-Robinson (2002) as requested by the referee.

> 2.- Several authors of this paper belong to the SNAP
> Collaboration. (Supernova Acceleration Probe ) is a space-
> based experiment pro-posed by Perlmutter et al.1999 (
> http://snap.lbl.gov ) to measure the expansion history of the
> Universe and study the dark energy. It is known that the control
> of systematic uncertainties is one of the pri-mary goals of
> SNAP.It would be interesting to learn what is expected from SNAP
> for the studies and the results presented by the authors in this
> paper.



> 3.- About references i)*"Aldering et al.in preparation" is often
> quoted by the authors. Is it a preprint now ?  ii)*page 4,
> Sullivan et al. quote in the text :"Phillips, 1999" : It seems to be
> missing in the "references".Or is it "Phillips et al., 1999" ? 
> iii)*it would be better to insert in the "references" : -P97 in
> "Perlmutter et al.1997" -P99 in "Perlmutter et al.1999" as it is
> mentionned in the text.

The Aldering et al. paper is still in preparation. The reference to
"Phillips, 1999" has been changed to "Phillips et al., 1999". P97 and
P99 are now so marked in the bibliography.


Other minor points:
===================

1) In the low-redshift sample of SNe, we have now decided to include
the Riess et al. SN 1996bo, as upon further examination we were able
to achieve a satisfactory fit to the light-curve.

2) For consistency with P99, we have re-fit the Riess et al. SNe using
the "exponential" template used in P99, rather than the "Parab20" from
Goldhaber et al. 2001. This has a very small effect on our final
numerical results and figures. The text is updated to reflect this
change.

3) Figure 4 (and related figures) had a small inconsistency. We
originally plotted "rejected" low-redshift C-T SNe, but did not plot
low-redshift "rejected" CfA SNe. We have remedied this by removing the
relevant C-T SNe from these plots (these SNe are used in none of the
cosmological fits in the paper).

4) We have made some other grammatical corrections and minor textual
additions.

Yours,

Mark Sullivan

-- 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
 Dr. Mark Sullivan,              Tel (Work)  : +44 (0)191 374 8293
 Room 321, Physics Department,   Tel (Home)  : +44 (0)191 383 2635
 (University of Durham),         Tel (Mobile): +44 (0)7786 862514 
 Science Labs, South Road,       Fax         : +44 (0)191 374 3749
 Durham DH1 3LE, UK              E-mail      : Mark.Sullivan@durham.ac.uk
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-