478 THE COLLIERY GUARDIAN. August 28, 1914. faster pace, be it said, than the British export trade. The countries not separately shown in the table include Great Britain, Norway, Sweden, Spain and Egypt. In addition, coke was sent in 1913 to certain countries— e.g., Mexico and the United States—that are not purchasers of German coal. Generally speaking, the principal markets for German coal are those within easy reach of the coalfields of the Ruhr and Silesia. The Upper and Lower Silesian coalfields are situated close to the borders of Austria and Russian Poland. From these districts, of which Breslau is the virtual centre, large quantities are also sent to Switzerland. But apart from the internal trade in Germany itself, it is the Ruhr coalfield that has been the great competitor of British coal. The Rhenish-Westphalian Coal Syn- dicate, which controls the greater part of the output in this coalfield, has made great headway in the foreign Table C.—Output of Coal in Prussia according to Coalfields. Year. Ruhr.* Upper Silesia. Saar. Lower Silesia. Aachen. Total Prussia. 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 tons. tons. tons. tons. tons. tons. 1900 ... 60,336 .. . 24,829 .. . 9,491 . .. 4,767 ... 1,771 . .. 101,966 1905 ... 66,915 .. . 27,015 .. . 10,774 . .. 5,304 ... 2,250 . .. 113,001 1906 ... 78,939 . . 29,660 .. .. 11,284 . ... 5,403 ... 2,251 . .. 128,296 1907 ... 82,403 .. .. 32,223 .. .. 10,840 . .. 5,580 ... 2,228 . .. 134,044 1908 ... 85,045 .. 33,966 .. . 11,223 . .. 5,624 ... 2,386 . .. 139,002 1909 ... 85,111 .. . 34,655 .. . 11,221 . .. 5,619 ... 2,566 . .. 139,906 1910 ... 89,315 .. .. 34,461 .. . 10 982 . .. 5,533 ... 2,745 . .. 143,772 1911 ... 93,801 .. . 36,654 .. . 11,637 . .. 5,647 ... 2,847 . .. 151,324 1912 ...103.093 .. .. 41,544 .. . 12,470 . .. 5,902 ... 3,057 . .. 167,350 * Including mines on the left bank of the Rhine. Table D.—Output of Lignite (1,000 Tons). Year. Prussia. Saxe- Altenburg Saxony. Brunswick. Anhalt. Hesse. Bavaria. Other German States. Total. 1900 34,008 1,866 1,541 1,360 1,347 256 39 81 40,498 1905 44,149 2,408 2,168 1,725 1,465 422 122 52 52,512 1906 47,913 2,235 2,314 1,924 1,415 434 140 44 56,420 1907 52,661 3,061 2,486 2,166 1,368 476 286 43 62,547 1908 55,457 3,789 2,884 2,280 1,306 466 1,415 18 67,615 1909 56,030 4,080 3,168 2,099 1,294 499 1,480 9 68,658 1910 56,644 3,972 3,624 2,058 1,266 482 1,495 6 69,547 1911 60,532 3,657 4,325 1,881 1,321 499 1,548 11 73,774 1912 67,476 4,162 5,332 1,726 1,492 444 1,700 8 82,340 1913 70,256 — 6,316 — — — 1,895 — 87,116 Table E.—Production of Coke (1,000 Tons).* Year. Prussia. Saxony. Total. Dortmund. Bonn. Breslau. Halle. Clausthal. Total Prussia. 1901 8,052 380 633 — 34 9,100 63 9,163 1905 12,098 1,936 2,053 133 205 16,424 68 16,491 1906 15,556 2,168 2,173 136 166 20,199 67 20,266 1907 16,604 2,581 2,^95 139 153 21,872 66 21,938 1908 15,567 2,819 2,444 142 137 21,110 65 21,175 1909 15,534 3,180 2,401 145 84 21,344 63 21,408 1910 17,424 3,445 2,437 146 85 23,537 63 23,600 1911 18,828 3,546 2,655 138 86 25,253 62 25,405 1912 22,134 3,718 2,926 121 85 28,984 62 29,141 1913 24,737 3,928 3,114 145 86 32,010 65 32,168f * Not including gas coke. The production of coke at gasworks affiliated to the Wirtschaftliche Vereinigung deutscher Gaswerke has been:—1908,1,199,673 tons; 1909, 1,240,927 tons; 1910, 1,302,147 tons ; 1911, 1,206,831 tons; 1912, 2,141,910 tons. f Including 92,000 tons produced in Alsace-Lorraine. Table F —Production of Briquettes (1,000 Tons). Prussia. Saxony. Total. Year. Coal Lignite Coal Lignite Coal Lignite Bri- Bri- Bri- Bri- Bri- Bri- quettes. quettes. quettes. quettes. quettes. quettes. 1901 8,131 209 9,251 1905 11,569 363 13,075 1906 12,928 388 14,501 1907 ... 3,478 ... 11,053 ... 46 ... 404 ... 3,524 ... 12,890 1908 ... 3,942 ... 12,063 ... 53 ... 508 ... 3,995 ... 14,227 1909 ... 3,921 ... 12,446 ... 55 ... 602 ... 3,976 ... 14,834 1910 ... 4,386 ... 12,633 ... 55 ... 786 ... 4,441 ... 15,126 1911 ... 4,936 ... 14,197 ... 55 ... 953 ... 4,991 ... 16,837 1912 ... 5,273 ... 16,053 ... 61 ... 1,123 ... 5,334 ... 19,058 1913 ... 5,758 ... 17,694 ... 65 ... 1,493 ... 5,824 ... 21,418 Table G.—Exports of Coal from Germany (1,000 tons). Year. Austria- Hungary. Nether- lands. Belgium. Switzer- land. France. European Russia. Italy. Den- mark. Other countries. Total. 1885 2,485 2,947 742 1,129 601 312 59 5 676 8,956 1890 3,295 3,035 752 714 623 152 86 — 488 9,145 1895 4,380 3,457 783 577 750 199 22 11 182 10,361 1900 6, *04 3,682 1,619 804 1,145 844 21 40 1,117 15,276 1901 5,671 4,026 1,762 797 ' 1,029 839 32 51 1,059 15,266 1902 5,604 4,541 2,217 981 1,020 579 37 82 1,040 16,101 1903 5,659 5,181 2,409 1,073 1,086 605 63 114 1,200 17,390 1904 5,828 5,115 2,647 1,157 1,129 604 49 85 1,383 17,997 1905 6,045 4,432 2,539 1,371 1,157 971 161 112 1,369 18,157 1906 6,860 4,544 3,072 1,933 1,358 1,008 218 88 470 19,551 1907 8,459 4,347 3,070 1,325 1,585 836 173 29 237 2(1,061 1908 8,996 4,605 3,282 1,588 1,466 813 130 39 272 21,191 1909 9,537 5,034 3,803 1,953 1,391 810 232 92 499 23,351 1910 8,995 5,342 4,214 2,198 1,284 1,019 426 139 640 21,257 1911 9,754 5,951 4,687 2,843 1,363 1,279 516 149 865 27,406 1912 11,015 6,544 5,368 3,058 1,509 1,511 724 262 1,153 31,143 1913 12,153 7,218 5,728 3,242 1,639 2,103 892 220 1,379 34,574 markets, and this has not been due entirely to geographical or natural advantages. In the latter category may be placed the east of France, Holland, Denmark, Belgium and Switzerland. In the next article the position of German coals in the various markets will be considered in detail, and this will be followed by a study of the methods of organisa- tion that have been employed to extend the foreign trade in coal and its derivatives. LETTERS TO THE EDITORS. The Editors are not responsible either for the statements made, or the opinions expressed by correspondents. All communications must be authenticated by the name and address of the sender, whether for publication or not. No notice can be taken of anonymous communications. As replies to questions are only given by way of published answers to correspondents, and not by letter, stamped addressed envelopes are not required to be sent. DETACHING HOOKS. Sir,—In your issue of the 21st inst. there is a description of an improved detaching hook. Apart from the two small drop lock bolts at the top of the hook, it is difficult to find any fresh feature. The inefficiency of top locks is well known, and they are unnecessary in King’s hooks. The two-ring cylinder is no novelty, as the writer has sketches of hooks adapted to two, three, or more catch-ring cylinders. The insertion of other shackles introduces stresses which must have a detrimental influence on the resultant of the hook winding stresses. The variation or designs of parts add neither novelty, strength nor efficiency to other types of King’s hooks. The pin strengths referred to are apparently table strengths. There is the usual internal lock-pin, which is often sheared by vibration of hook stresses, so that whilst it is a variation of parts, the hook appears no improvement on other King type hooks. The defects revealed in detaching hooks during the past 30 years do show necessity of non-defective or proper hooks. Experience shows that (1) top catches have reactions which are of a hook-closing character; that their catch stresses are enormous and result in cylinder and catch-edge breakages; (2) that bottom catches (King types) are correct, because (a) their reactions are in the hook, (6) also that the catch- stresses are hook-opening ones, and below the hook centre pins; (3) as to locking, the bottom slot lock is good for bottom catches but easily unlocked by the vertical rebound of the cage (where the elastic limit of the materials is not overcome), easily effected by the large length of leverage at which the reaction (of top catches) occurs. Where hooks have top and bottom catches the reactions of the top are detrimental to the bottom. Having two or more catch edges distributes the catch stresses, but do not lessen reactions on the pins. Instead of looking at detach hooks as so many plates and pins fixed together, officials need to look more at their engineering force aspect. During normal winding, the variation of winding stresses sometimes crystalises and at other times shears the internal copper lock-pins. External locks, not subject to these stresses, are necessary to safeguard internal lock-pins. The hook has to open quickly to prevent mounting, hence the slope of the shutting projection has to have an acute angle. The catch stresses must be below the hook centre pin, and reactions go through or below such pin and between the two pins. A number of bottom catches divide the catch stresses on catch plates or cylinder flanges. In order to reduce the pin stresses, separate catches are useful on the non-swing plates. Thus we may judge detach hooks by (1) Safeguarded riding locks. (2) Correct placement of catch stresses and their reactions in the hook. (3) Correct locking as near the catch stresses as possible, to reduce moment of unlock reactions; and use of bottom locks. (4) Division of catch stresses and reactions on a number of (a) catch edges, (b) catch surfaces, and (c) catch pins. I do not wish merely to criticise any particular hook, as all types over five years of age have done good service; but their defects are too serious and costly to be ignored, as they appear to be both by maker and user, in the hope that such defects will not cause further trouble. C. M. DISTINGUISHED AUTHOR’S APPEAL. Sir,—A writer of novels has a duty beyond the mere entertainment of his fellow countrymen. He has to preach to them the gospel whereby he keeps his soul alive. To the best of my ability I have done so these last twenty years. But there are times like the present when he cannot preach through his customary channels. He has to crave the hospitality of columns such as yours in order to speak the truth that is in him. May 1 now crave this hospitality, so as to make an appeal to the Press of this country ? It is time that a tremendous truth should be boldly stated. N o patriotic man or woman can have failed to stand aghast at the inadequate response to Lord Kitchener’s summons to Britain’s manhood. One would have thought that at such a trumpet call a million men had leaped forth on the instant, eager to defend their country in its hour of need. A million men one would have thought; but now we have but bare a hundred thousand—a meagre hundred thousand. Yet, thank God, a saving remnant of a hundred thousand patriotic men. I appeal to the Press to awaken the labouring popula- tion of Great Britain and Ireland from their ghastly apathy. I appeal to the Press to inspire with patriotism the trades unions of our land. The proletariat have been too long trained by demagogues of the Keir Hardie and Larkin type and the scum of uneducated thought to put class above nationality. They have been too long trained to believe in the shibboleth of the “ solidarity of labour.” They have been misguided into believing in the brother- hood of their German comrades. It is now the season for this illusion to be shattered. Brotherhood! The Press must tell them that it is a term accursed. As their German brothers have slaughtered the wives and children of Belgian brothers and laid waste their homes, so little will these German brothers reck of their British brethren, should they set foot on these shores. I appeal to the Press to sweep false gods away from the hearths of Great Britain. You may declare the operatives, the miners, the farm hands, all the trades, to be patriotic. So verily will they declare themselves. Nightly they will howl loyalty at music halls and picture theatres. On the news of an unimportant British victory they will wave futile flags and hold facile revelry in the streets. Patriotism in a way, yes. But have they come forward to obey their country’s call ? They have not. What is a hundred thousand men ? What is a hundred thousand men among the twenty-two millions of males in the British Isles ? The manhood of our foes and friends has rallied in millions around the standard. I appeal to the Press to drive home the truth to my fellow countrymen. The hand of hunger is already clutching at the throat of our labouring population. They will appeal for help to charitable funds. Before he claims, let each man think what in the name of God and his country he has done to deserve assistance. The upper and middle classes have given their time, their brain, their substance, their flesh and their blood— everything a proud and outraged people has to give— from the Queen, who is working night and day and has sent her son to the forefront of the North Sea battles, to the shop assistant, who is ingloriously driving an ammunition wagon along our dusty roads. What is our army of labour doing ? As far as one can see, they are looking on at this world struggle as they look on at a football match. If they are doing more, why have we not the million men ? Northumberland miners are out of work. They are arranging for overdrafts from banks to help them in their distress. The Miners’ Association, so says the Evening Standard Qi August 22, hopes to receive some relief from county and national funds. National funds! Funds that are for those who have fought and bled for their country. Old men, women and children, yes. To them we give of all our substance. But to stout and splendid men—no, ten thousand times no 1 Why should they whimper for pence when their place is in the battle line of the Empire ? I appeal to the Press to make it known that every ablebodied man fit for service who accepts one penny of the Prince of Wales’s or other relief fund is robbing the widow and the orphan—is committing a meaner action than stealing the pennies from a blind man’s dog.