454

THE COLLIERY GUARDIAN.

March 10, 1916.

mind th© stratigraphical conditions in the Province of
Limburg, he distinguishes between the following anti-
clinal axes, .running north-east, but bending more and
more towards the east the further westward they ex.end.
The first runs through Mechlin and Lanklaer (bores Nos.
21 and 46), the second vid Zonhoven (boring No. 18) and
Meeuwen (boring No. 30); the third through Heusden
(boring No. 27) and Coursel (boring No. 55). These flat
anticlines .separate four very flat basins, those of
Meeswyck, Asch, Houthalen and Beeringen. In the
first three the strike of the strata is mostly east-south-
east.

The dip increases toward the southern border of the
Ciampine coal field, exhibiting, from south to north,
fluctuations, such as can be observed in the basins of
Asch and Houthael-en.

The carboniferous strata encountered in the 'Stockheim
boring (No. 52), to the eastward of the Dilsen fault (in
boring No. 50), seem to form a small anticline. This
is the forerunner of the one which caused the tilting of
the strata in the borings near the meridian of Sittard,
and effected the separation of the basins in Du.ch
Limburg and the Campine.

In the Beeringen basin the strata strike north-west.
The dip is here very slight, but tilts up again between
the borings at Quaedmecheln (No. 25) and Baalen (No.
56), whilst taking a northerly course. Here also the
strata indicate an anticline influenced by faults, and one
of more importance than that already mentioned, the
axis passing close to the Zittaert boring (No. 34). In
this way a separation is effected between the deposits in
the Province of Limburg, and those of the Province of
Antwerp, similar to that known at Sittard in Dutch
Limburg and in the Samson valley in the Centre basin.

The scanty borings in the province of Antwerp, and
the wide distances by which they are separated, afford
but little material for deductions as to the stratigraphical
conditions. Following the analogy of the tectonic con-
ditions in Limburg, and on the assumption that the
strata at the southern boundary of that province are
identical with those found in the Gheel boring (No. 35),
there would appear to be a very flat basin, interrupted
by a ridge running westisouth-west. To this basin
belong the strata of Santhoven (boring No. 39) and the
carboniferous limestone of Kessel (boring No. 38). In
such case the Gheel boring (No. 35) would coincide with
the crown of an unimportant arch, the slope of which is
indicated further north by the increased dip of the
strata in the boring No. 58.

According to Fourmarier and Renier, boring No. 57
at Vlimmern traverses strata of their No. 4 fossil zone
and a barren series which they regard as identical with
that of Beeringen and Zittaert. For this reason, Denoel
included this boring in his No. IV. stage. This would
imply that the strata turn again northward from the
Santhoven boring (No. 39). It must, however, be borne
in mind that the differences between the fossil zones 4
and 5 are not very striking, and that consequently the
boring No. 57, with a gas content of 12 per cent., would
be better included (pace Denoel) in zone 5.

In the meantime, the Dutch borings have shown that
the lower carboniferous extends westward in a fairly
straight line up to the sea. It may therefore be assumed
that the productive carboniferous takes the same course
in the west as it does in the east.

Forir, also, assumes the existence of a number of flat
troughs. Westward of the Dutch Limburg trough, he
believes he has identified two troughs in the Campine,
the more easterly of them being by far the more
extensive.

In the author’s opinion, the borings carried out in
the Campine ’ are insufficient to enable us to test the
accuracy of Denoel and Forir’s assumption—based on
the identification of the seams—of the existence of anti-
clines and troughs, which would imply a wavy contour
of the southern boundary.

As to the northern boundary, nothing is known; and
from the practical standpoint it will be determined by
the depth at which modern mining methods will enable
working to be carried on. This, Denoel assumes to be
1,500 m., which is probably correct.

(To be continued.)

t-	.hi —■■■ '	.. , ■■■■   —i

Bunker Coal Dispute.—Sitting in the Commercial Court of
the King’s Bench Division on Friday last, Mr. Justice
Scrutton heard the action of Scott Brothers, Limited, of
Newcastle-on-Tyne, v. the Plisson Steam Navigation Com-
pany and Messrs. Roth Brothers, Cardiff. The claim was
for £226 19s. 9d., for a quantity of bunker coal' delivered to
the ss. “ Reapwell,” in the River Tyne. The defendant com-
pany denied liability, and Messrs. Roth said they acted as
agents.—For the plaintiffs, Mr. Raeburn said the “ Reap-
well ” was one of the steamers managed by Roth Brothers,
all of which were mortgaged. The mortgagee of the
“ Reapwell ” was a late Mr. Cohen. Negotiations were
entered into between the Plisson Company and Roth Brothers,
whereby the company were to take over the steamers on
certain terms. In June 1914, when the “ Reapwell ” was
in the Thames, Mr. Cohen, the mortgagee, took possession,
but it was arranged that she should go on a voyage arranged
by Roth Brothers for her. Part of the arrangement which
had been made was that when the vessels were taken over,
all profit earned by the “ Reapwell ” after May 28, 1914,
should belong to Plisson and Company. Then arose the
question of financing the ship, and it seemed that the Plisson
Company were to do this. It was desired that the vessel, on
her way to Canada, should bunker in the Tyne. Roth
Brothers had the coal contract with Scott Brothers, the plain-
tiffs, and they wrote to the plaintiffs telling them to supply
the coal to the “ Reapwell,” and send the invoice to the
Plisson Company. This occurred on July 13. There were
about 280 tons of coal supplied, and for this £226 19s. 9d. was
now claimed. The outbreak of war in August prevented the
carrying out of the arrangement for the increase of capital
contemplated.—His lordship, in giving judgment, said the
plaintiffs were entitled to succeed against both defendants,
and he would therefore give judgment against both for the
amount claimed, with costs, together with interest at the
rate of 6 per cent, from August 7 to the present date.

Estate Management and Mineral Valuations.*

By G. TURVILLE BROWN.

As a rule the mining surveyor’ is more of an engineer
than a land agent, although many practise in the dual
capacity. On the largest estates it is common to find
that the land agent works either with a mining surveyor
on his staff, or in conjunction with a consulting mining
surveyor or engineer in practice in ith© district.

Mineral Wealth. — The minerals produced in this
country may be divided inio five classes

First of all the coals and shales of England, Wales
and Scotland, with which are associated the carboni-
ferous fireclays and ironstones.

Secondly, the iron ores of the Midlands, Cleveland
and Cumberland.

Thirdly, stone and sand for smelting and building
purposes, clays, shales, and earths for brickmaking
and pottery, and chalk and limestone.

Fourthly, ores other than iron ore, such as tin, lead,
copper, zinc and gold, and wi.h them may be included
the slate of Wales, Cumberland, and Westmorland,
and the china clay of Devonshire and Cornwall.

Fifthly, the Cheshire salt.

This paper deals almost exclusively with districts pro-
ducing coal and iron.

The reports of the two Commissions on Coal Supplies
indicate that for several hundred years to come we need
have no fear as to the sufficiency of our supplies, and
;hat although a great deal of the coal which can be most
easily and cheaply mined has been got, there is no
reason to fear that the competitive power of our collieries
as against foreign coal will be impaired during the years
to come.

The state of development to which Britain has been
brought by the capital expended in railways and docks,
and in all other ways which tend to economy and effici-
ency in production and transport, and the geographical
position of the mines, will probably more than com-
pensate for greater difficulties in obtaining the coal.

The districts which are likely to increase their output
are the greai South Yorkshire, Nottinghamshire, and
Derbyshire field, and the steam and anthracite coal
field of South Wales. From these two fields it is certain
that, if the output is wanted, considerably greater
supplies can be obtained in the future.

On ihe subject of iron ore the position is far less
satisfactory. Any mining surveyor who could discover
further sources of ore which could be worked cheaply,
and which would give a metallic content of 30 per cent,
or over, within reach of our coal fields, would be doing
his country a very great service. It would appear that
that Government might well initiate an enquiry into ;he
matter of our iron ore supplies on the lines of the two
Coal Commissions. Failing fresh discoveries of iron
ore in these islands, it is probable that future smelting
work will be placed on the coasts in places where
foreign ore can be put direct from ocean-going ships into
the furnaces. •

Leases.—British minerals have been developed on a
leasehold basis, and a short description of the way in
which lessors receive payment for their rights and a
note of the covenants contained in mineral leases may
be stated. The figures given are within ordinary
experience.

Surface rents are usually at twice the agricultural rent
(£2 to £5 an acre), though they vary greatly in different
districts.

Royalty is reserved in a number of ways :—

(1)	By tonnage rent (3d. to Is.), reserved either as
a flat rent on all classes of mineral, or in the case of coal
by one rent for large (9d.) and another for small (3d.),
with or without allowance (5 per cent.) for fuel con-
sumed, and in the case of iron ore either by flat rent
(3d. to Is. 3d.), or by a sliding scale rent varying with
the metallic content (30 per cent. = 6d. + -2d. for
each additional unit).

(2)	By acreage rent of so much per acre for the
mineral (£30 to £150 for the bed or seam). This in
coal is often taken at a footage rent per acre, so much
for each foot (£15 to £35) of thickness of the seam.
A foot acre gives 1,200 to 1,500 tons of coal and 2,250
to 2,750 of ironstone.

(3)	By fraction (l-12th to l-15th) of the selling
price at the mine, sometimes with a minimum and
a maximum, but more often with a minimum only.
Modern practice is not in favour of the sliding scale

royalty, and the trend of business seems to be towards
tonnage rents and footage .rents; the former are perhaps
more common in South Wales, and the latter in York-
shire. Tonnage rents are perhaps the most satisfactory,
but in that case the lessor’s mining surveyor has to be
most careful to see that the lessee sends out all the
mineral he ought to from the area.; in footage rent cases
his concern is to make most accurate surveys to insure
that the lessor is paid each half-year for the acreage
mined. Allowance for faults, wash-outs, barren ground,
pillars, and barriers is usually made.

Dead rents (£1 to £5 per acre) are charged in prac-
tically all mining leases. They are recoupable out of
royalties, in many old leases over a three or seven years’
period, but now almost always throughout the term.
The old idea of the amount of a dead rent was some-
thing approaching the full amount of the expected
royalty divided by the term of the lease, but modern
ideas have very much reduced the proportion it bears
to the gross royalty. On large areas £1 per acre is
common.

Wayleaves (^d. to Id. a ton), in the case of foreign
coal carried through a property, either above or below
ground, are generally asked, but in the case of large
new undertakings they are not so generally given.

* From a paper read before the Surveyors’ Institution on
March 6.

The full term of a mining lease was formerly 40 or
60 years, the latter being the longest period that a tenant
for life under the Settled Land Acts can grant, but it
is now not uncommon for 80 or 99 years to be asked for
and agreed to, though on settled estates the leave of
the court to grant so long a term has to be obtained.

Working covenants used formerly to bind the lessee
“ to work the area with all diligence and without inter-
mission,” but now more latitude is given, and the
covenants usually allow the area to be worked in
common with the areas of o.her owners. This conces-
sion, in the case of large concerns to be opened out on
the “ longwall ” principle, is an absolute necessity.

In the general covenants, subsidence, support, pre-
vention of smoke and fumes (which are discussed later),
access to the mine and to the plans and books of account
which the- lessee undertakes to keep, indemnification
against claims by surface tenants and owners of other
lands and minerals, and provision of weighing machines,
are dealt with, in addition to such of the ordinary
covenants contained in surface leases as are applicable.
Restoration “ fit for cultivation ” of the surface land
occupied, or payment for it at an agreed rate (£50 to
£100 an acre), is also stipulated for at the end of the
lease. Power ito remove plant (but not permanent brick
or stone buildings), subject to a right of pre-emption by
til© lessor and to the carrying out of covenants, is usually
given to the lessee. In some leases mineral left
unworked is to be measured up/ and paid for by the
lessee. A full arbitration clause is always added.

Subsidence and Support. — Subsidence and support
are matters on which great difficulties arise, and in
connection with which the tact and knowledge of an
experienced agent are of the greatest value. There is
no such thing as working coal by modern methods with-
out letting down the surface of the ground, although on
the Continent, by what is known as hydraulic packing,
it has been found possible to take out an entire stratum
without material disturbance of the surface. The diffi-
culties of applying such a method here would probably
be so great as to render it impossible to work the
mineral at a profit.

Two general rules of subsidence may be noted. The
first is that the strata always break at right angles to
the dip, so that workings do not affect, except in the
case of absolutely flat strata, the surface of the ground
immediately above them, but a point where a line drawn
at right angles to their dip strikes the surface. This in
the case of deep mines lying at high angles is a very
considerable distance from a point vertically above the
working, and this fact is especially important, in view
of the legal cases affecting subsidence, which will be
mentioned later.

The second rule (which is not such an “ axiom ” as
the first) is that the amount by which the surface falls
is usually about two-thirds of the thickness of the
stratum extracted, i.e., if a 3 ft. seam is taken out,
the surface falls about 2 ft.

In the case of agricultural land, mere subsidence does
not always cause damage, unless drainage is interfered
with, though there are cases where, by disturbance of
strata beneath, the land ceases to have the power of
holding its subsoil water, and consequently becomes so
liable to burn in the sun that its value is diminished.

With regard to buildings, if it is desired to mine
under land already built on, or to build on land to be
mined under, the advice of the mining engineer should
always be sought. Buildings should be placed, if pos-
sible, with their length parallel to the level course or
strike of the strata, so that their shorter side is on the
dip. They should be put on concrete rafts, reinforced
in the case of heavy buildings. A useful reinforcement
can be made by inserting in the lower part of the con-
crete raft a spiral of an old colliery winding rope with
old rails put in across it at evenly spaced intervals.

It is a great question whether, when coal is to be
worked on the “ longwall ” principle, pillars should be
left even for the support of such important buildings as
churches and mansions. But if it is decided to leave
pillars, it is of the first importance to leave them large
enough. A small pillar left for the protection of a
building is probably a greater danger than no pillar at
all. In legal questions affecting subsidence some very
important cases have lately been decided.

Surface Rights.—One class of case affects the whole
question of the relative rights of surface owners and
mineral owners in those large areas in which the surface
and the minerals are in different freehold ownership.
Among these may be mentioned Davis v. Treharne,
New Sharlston Colliery Company v. The Earl of West-
morland, and The Butterley Company v. The New
Hucknall Company.

From these cases it seems that a person having the
right to work minerals by lease (and probably also, by
implication, under conveyance) has no right to let down
the surface unless the specific right to do so has been
reserved to him. This means that, for many areas, the
mine owner has to make terms with the surface owner,
and the point has most certainly to be borne in mind in
all future lettings and sales- of minerals.

Another recent case affects only the land of public
undertakings, such as railways, canals, etc. Ender the
various Acts by which the companies acquired their
lands, they did not acquire the underlying minerals, but
anybody desiring to work within 40 yds. (or other
limit prescribed by special Acts) of the mineral imme-
diately underlying the company’s land, is bound to give
due notice of his intention to the company, which then
has the option of either purchasing the mineral by arbi-
tration, or of taking the risk which the working would
cause. The mineral under the statutory company’s
land, and the strips 40 yds. wide adjoining it, was dealt