I do not believe that privately sharing that material for research purposes would be an infringement of copyright.
A shame that anyone’s dedicated work might be denied us for more general inspection/appraisal.
These days we have a ready tool to give an extra check on older observations in the form of WinJUPOS. Alluding to Roth’s “Handbook for Planet Observers” (1970) on Plate 29 are eight drawings captioned “Drawings of observations of Uranus with 4-inch and 10-inch instruments in the years 1936 (top left) and 1949 (bottom right)”
Unfortunately not very forthcoming on dates/times etc. But for the years given both drawings suggest an equatorial aspect particularly 1949 which in fact WinJUPOS shows to be very polar and 1936 well advanced toward polar! In contrast with Schiaparelli’s 1880s observations for which WinJUPOS shows Uranus to be more equatorial in presentation.
So with WinJUPOS we have a convenient way to more qualitatively/fairly evaluate past observations. At least better than draw some arbitrary line based on some observational failure/’success’ (illusion-wise) to see features without full appraisal of the methods used- i.e. such as disregard of the proper light-level so more risking any diaphanous features are lost or the manifestation of spuriosity. Of course it is vital to show the field-orientation with drawings/images; many fall short with this sadly.
I could add a host of pitfalls; and as I have said several times before: “this planet is not for the faint-hearted nor the reckless”. I try to adopt a relaxed benignly objective approach at the eyepiece – as opposed to gullible/wishful-thinking and certainly not the respective angsts of failure-fear or cynical-negativity!