April 14, 1916.

THE COLLIERY GUARDIAN.

709

kinds of coal exported was 21s. l*5d.< as compared
with. 19s. 9*6d. in February. Otherwise divided, it
realised the following:—Steam coal, 21s. 8’ld. ; gas
coal, 18s. 4-09d. ; anthracite, 23s. 6’9d. ; house-
hold, 23s. 10’ld. ; other sorts, 17s. 8‘3d. The
average value of the coke exported was 31s. l*9d. per
ton, and of the manufactured fuel 26s. 3-3d. per ton.

The average value of coal, coke and' manu-
factured fuel exported during March was 21s. 8*7d.,
as compared with 15s. 4Td. in March 1915, and
13s. 9‘2d. in March 1914. The average value during
the three months was 20s. 4‘3d., as compared with
14s. 5’2d. per ton and 13s. ll’7d. in the corresponding
periods of 1915 and 1914.

Board of Trade returns show a decrease of 4*7 per
cent, in the coal raised in the United Kingdom last
year and a decrease of 12*2 per cent in the number
of men employed, as compared with 1914.

The Ministry of Munitions has fixed maximum
prices for coke, steel, and bar iron.

A paper on “The Sinking and Equipment of a
Circular Shaft ” was read by Mr. J. Nisbet before
the Mining Institute of Scotland on Saturday last.

At a general meeting of the North of England
Institute of Mining and Mechanical Engineers, in
Newcastle, on Saturday, Mr. A. S. Blatchford read a
paper on “The Influence of Incombustible Sub-
stances on Coal Dust Explosions.”

Mr. Sherwood Hunter dealt with “ Economies in
Coal Washing,” in a paper read at a meeting of the
Manchester Geological and Mining Society, on
Tuesday.

Mr. Balfour Browne, K.C., as arbiter, awarded an
increase of 6^ per cent., or 3d. a day, to the Scottish
miners, who demanded 18f per cent.

A paper on “ Some Work in the Kent Coalfield”
will be read by Mr. F. Meachem, at a meeting of the
South Staffordshire and Warwickshire Institute of
Mining Engineers, in Birmingham, on Monday next.

It is a healthy symptom of national
Industrial vigour that the British nation should
Research, be at last awakening to the necessity
of a complete reorganisation of its
industrial methods, and the elimination of such
shortcomings as the great war has brought into
prominence. Amongst the most urgent of these
reforms the Erst to claim consideration is the better
recognition of the relation of science to industry, and
the encouragement of research in regard to the
practical routine of daily life. It is not quite true
to say that the war has brought to light a certain
weakness in our educational methods, for this has
long been known to many of our more advanced
thinkers and publicists ; but what the war has done
has been to reveal its practical consequences and to
convince the nation at large of the fact that all is
not perfect in our existing system.

Before, however, proper consideration can be given
to this question, or the best way can be discovered
for its amelioration, it is necessary to see clearly
where our deficiencies lie, and to state precisely what
is wrong. A great deal has been written and spoken
on this subject in the last few months, and the issue
has been more or Jess obscured by a multitude
of well - meaning but diverse opinions upon it.
Generally, the result has been to revive in an acute
form that well-worn controversy upon the proper
place of science in our educational system. To
pursue the discussion upon these lines, however, is
not very promising, because the protagonists on
either side are too wedded to abstract principles to
appreciate each other’s point of view. The real
crux of the matter is not so much the relative educa-
tional value of science as compared with classics, as
the true relation between science and industry. In
other words, the dispute is not between the sciences
and the humanities as a means of training the
mental faculties of the young: it is rather a question
of the best way to remedy the want of sympathy
that exists between the practical business man and
the scientific theorist. The former is too often
indifferent to the business value of research, while
the latter is frequently so far removed from practical
affairs that he is altogether out of touch with
industrial things. To put the matter upon its proper
plane, therefore, it seems to be necessary, in the first

place, to rule out all the old academic questions of
mental training and equipment, and to start de novo
with some practical method for bringing workers in
pure science into closer relation with our arts and
industries, and at the same time to induce business
men to make greater use of scientific research. Ip.
other words, it is necessary to create a real demand
for applied science as a professional career. The
supply will follow as a natural sequence. ?

No one can pretend that there has been either an
adequate demand or even any real encouragement
for such a training. Few attractive careers have
hitherto been within reach of average young men of
scientific attainments. With a very few exceptions
only a small number of the more brilliant have had
any hope of recognition or reward outside their
college walls. The result has been an inevitable
estrangement between pure and applied science. As
Sir Thomas Holland said in his address to the
conference of delegates at the Manchester meeting of
the British Association, the growth of science and of
commercial technology has been largely independent
and unrelated, that is, without organisation.

There have been numerous practical suggestions
for the remedy of this evil. It has been proposed to
create a Ministry of Science, and this suggestion has
been supported, amongst others, by Sir William
Crooks and also by Sir Egbert Hadfield, who may
be admitted to be at once one of our foremost
captains of industry, and one of our most eminent
exponents of the scientific method. In the meantime
the Government has appointed a Committee of the
Privy Council with the assistance of an Advisory
Council composed o£ eminent scientific men and also
men actually engaged in industries dependent upon
scientific discovery, the object being to promote
scientific and industrial research. A strong
Mining Committee has been formed, in two sections?
dealing respectively with non-metals and metals, the
former being under the chairmanship of Sir William
Garforth, and the latter under that of Mr. Edgar
Taylor. Two sectional Committees for Metallurgy
have also been constituted, Sir Egbert Hadfield,
and Sir Gerard Muntz being the respective
chairmen for the ferrous and non-ferrous metals
respectively.

In the meantime existing scientific bodies are
taking steps to assist in the movement thus initiated.
The Eoyal Society is moving to free itself from the
reproach of too great a detachment from practical
affairs, and the British Science Guild is making a
bid for recognition as being par excellence the nucleus
of a complete organisation for the purpose in view.
The present situation, indeed, affords an admirable
opportunity for the British Science Guild to justify
its existence. It was originally established for the
very purpose in view, and although its labours have
not yet received the recognition it undoubtedly
deserves, this body has already proceeded a consider-
able way in consolidating its position, and in an
unostentatious manner, has succeeded in doing much
admirable work in the interests of the nation.

The technical Press has been invited to assist in
bringing this movement into prominence, and we
cordially respond to that request. It is our privilege
to represent an industry which is largely dependent
upon applied science for its successful pursuit. A
new era in the development of our national resources
is now in sight. This development may not be either
easy or speedy, but, as Sir Eonald Eoss has recently
remarked, “ war is a rapid arbiter, and the sword
does not wait for the armour to be girded on.”

The high cost of coal in Italy, and
Freights also in other allied countries, has
and Italian led to an outburst of what has been
Trade. happily described as “ economic
exasperation.” Amongst the latest
expressions of views upon the subject, mention may
be made of a letter published a few days back in
The Times from the pen of Baron di San Severino,
who is now in this country as a representative of the
Italian Navy League and the Italian Chamber of
Commerce. This letter is intended as a reply to
those who hold that there is no real foundation for
this spirit of exasperation. From what the Baron
tells us, it is unfortunately impossible to deny the

fact that Italian industrialists are seriously perturbed
by the enormous rise in the price of coal in Italy.
Whereas the increase of cost in Great Britain is to
be measured in shillings only, in Italy the rise
exceeds £6 per ton, and purchasers in that country
have been compelled to pay nearly £8 per ton on
delivery for this necessary adjunct to the manu-
facturing industries. We cannot withhold our
deepest sympathy with our Allies in this situation,
which is truly described as a national calamity. It
is far from any wish of this country to add to the
difficulties of our Italian friends, for, as the Baron
truly says, it is to the highest interests of Great
Britain to preserve the economic potentiality of
nations fighting our cause. Even on purely selfish
considerations this is true, for the financial needs of
our Allies are as much our own concern as theirs. It
is of interest, therefore, to examine the Italian point
of view as to the responsibility for the abnormal
rise in freights, to which the present position is
attributable.

Baron di San Severino does not appear to be
willing to exculpate British shippers, although he
admits that the Cardiff shipments of coal to Italy are
to a large extent carried in foreign vessels. But
this very fact constitutes one of the chief
difficulties to be overcome in devising any
measures to limit freights. As we have before
pointed out in these columns, the Cardiff Chamber of
Commerce is as much concerned as our Italian
friends at the excessive cost of coal freights, and a
limitation of freight charges has been urged as a
remedy. Such a course, however, could hardly be
effective in the absence of control of foreign tonnage.
Baron Severino also finds in the excess profits tax a
direct incentive to high freights. He maintains that
this tax encourages ship owners to increase their
charges so that the half of the profit remaining to
them may represent as large a sum as possible. Mr.
E. P. Houston, however, very properly points out
that Italy is directly benefited by this war tax, as it
enables Great Britain to extend financial assistance
to that country to an extent which might not other-
wise be possible.

In our own view, the argument that the excess
profits tax has any material influence upon the
situation has no foundation, and until we know
what freight charges the Italian ship owners are
themselves levying, we cannot attempt to attribute
the blame to the extortionate demands of other
ship owners. Eelief can only come from an increase
of available tonnage, either by the supply of new
vessels or by the better use of those now afloat.

Mr. Houston is not satisfied that the British
Government is making the best use of requisitioned
ships. In a recent letter to the Sunday Times, he
enumerates instances where tonnage is said to have
been extravagantly used for naval and military
purposes. That is not at all unlikely under the
circumstances, and most of us will agree that the
needs of our naval and military forces, and those of
our Allies, must at all costs be supplied ; nor is perfect
organisation to be expected under the exceptional
strain so suddenly thrown upon the transport depart-
ments of the Government. That efforts towards
economy are being made we know. Only this week
Mr. Thomas Harrison, chairman of the Great
Southern of Spain Eailway Company Limited, stated
that the British Government had continued its effec-
tive assistance to the iron ore industry of Spain by
allowing Admiralty transports to load return cargoes
from that country. But Spain, no less than Italy, is
suffering from dear coal.

Upon the general question of England’s trade with
Italy, an interesting address was recently given in
Eome to the local branch of the Patriotic League of
Britons Beyond the Seas by Prof. Luigi Luiggi, who
is well known in this country both as an eminent
engineer and a sincere friend to British interests.
His remarks only applied indirectly to the question
of coal exports, but he had many suggestions for the
improvement of our trade relations with Italy. As
an engineer, he advocated means whereby the British
manufacturer could be put upon equal terms with
German competitors, by means of a system of ferry
boats, which would enable trucks to run direct from
England to Italy, through France, without breaking