March 1, 1918.

THE COLLIERY GUARDIAN.

437

the ultimate value of coal at the pithead, and it was
a well-known fact that the more that was done the
more profits increased compared with the previous
system. He was speaking more particularly of the
tendency to instal by-product plant at every modern
colliery where it was possible. Of course, the instal-
lation of such plant involved very great increase in
capital expenditure, and, therefore, that meant that
out of their annual gross receipts they had got to put
aside more towards the redemption of the increased
capital expenditure. But he had known some cases
where a bare profit had been turned into a very con-
siderable one by the simple introduction of by-product
plant in that way. As against that, of course, they
had to contend with the increased wages of the miners
and possibly shorter hours. With regard to the basis
of rating, it appeared that, owing to the many uncer-
tain factors incidental to mining concerns, opinion was
divided as to whether the railway method of assess-
ment should be adopted or a fixed tonnage rate levied.
The advantage of a fixed tonnage rate would be that
the owner would know beforehand what he had to
contend with. On the other hand, taking the prin-
ciple of ability to pay, it appeared that the railway
method would be the fairest; but the railway method
had the great disadvantage and objection, from the
point of view of mine owners, that it involved the dis-
closure of figures as to working costs, capital, profits,
and so on, which mine owners did not care to place at
the disposal of outsiders.

Deductions,

The President (Mr. A. L. Ryde) remarked that it
would be quite sufficient for him to raise four or five
points with regard to the rating of mines. There were
really only three ways in which to arrive at the ratable
value of mines. One was to get at the rent which was
being paid for the mine; another was to get at the
rent which should be paid for it, with the experience
of what was being paid for other mines; and the third
was the rent which a mine was really worth, taking
into account what could be made out of it—that was
the receipts and expenditure method. There were
objections to all three. In the first place, the rent
which was being paid was fixed in the more or less
remote past; in other words, a rent fixed two or three
years ago might be double what it was if fixed 40 years
ago; but the ratable value of the mine was exactly
the same theoretically. If they took the second
method of comparing the rental of a mine with what
other mines were letting at, they got into the same
difficulty, because the rents varied so enormously. The
third method was, in his opinion, the right way to get
at the true value of the mine, but they were met at
once with the difficulty that the coal mining companies
objected to show their accounts. They had got very
good reasons for it, entirely apart from rating; they
did not want to show to their competitors the way
they worked, and all that sort of thing. The conse-
quence was that one could very seldom get at the
accounts. One could generally arrive at the conclu-
sion that, if a company was willing to show its
accounts, or if it was anxious to show its accounts, it
was doing pretty badly. He meant that they would
not go before an assessment committee and show their
accounts unless they could show how badly they were
doing. By that means they sometimes got their
ratable value reduced very considerably. With regard
to fixed plant, he noticed that Capt. Bowen said it
must be taken into account, the theory being that the
output of coal would be increased thereby. The fact
was a mine had to be rated as an equipped mine, pre-
cisely in the same way as a person who took a plot of
land at a ground rent and built a house on it. They
did not rate the plot of land at the rent that the land
let for only, but they had to take the land plus the
house. In the case of a colliery, they had to take the
royalty paid for the coal, and also the interest on the
equipment of the mine. The equipment of the mine
did not form so large a proportion of the total as
interest on the money spent on the house did on the
total rent of the property, but still it must be taken
into account, and when they only took royalty they had
only got part of the value. With regard to deduc-
tions from the gross value to arrive at ratable value,
there was a case, well known to rating surveyors,
which had decided that when once the gross estimated
rental of any property appeared in a rate, nobody had
any power to increase it. The consequence was that
an appellant could say, “ I don’t object to that gross,
but I do object to the amount you have taken off to
represent the repairs to the property.” A well-known
rating firm had simply made hay of a certain union’s
valuation lists by making use of that power, and show-
ing that a deduction of 15 per cent, that had been
made should have been nearer 60 per cent. This they
did without difficulty, because the greater part of the
work down below in the way of labour was actually
involved in keeping the mine in a fit state to work it.
As regarded collieries in South Wales, an allowance
of 14 per cent, was not anything like enough. With
regard to by-product plant, no doubt it considerably
increased the value of the property, but it did not
form part of a colliery company’s main business; and
he thought it was proper to assess the by-product plant
at a separate figure apart from the mine, so that the
mines could be compared one with another, since a
mine with a by-product plant was quite a different
property to one without it. A similar remark might
be made with regard to mines equipped with electrical
power houses, which were a great improvement in
mines. The old-fashioned plan of having steam
engines on the surface, and perhaps compressed air
down below, was nothing like so good; but there was
the point referred to by Mr. Jones that the value of
the plant formerly used, and which was practically
“ scrapped,” should not be assessed.

The discussion then terminated.

The Ministry of Reconstruction has appointed a com-
mittee to deal with the question of manufacturers’ stocks
after the war.

COAL ECONOMY.

In the course of an address delivered at Nottingham
on February 22, Prof. W. H. McMillan, B.Sc., said
that, whilst much had been said and written recently
on the subject of coal economy, the appeals which had
been made by scientists for a serious consideration of
the question had failed to reach the larger public, and
to draw its attention to the great issues at stake. The
whole problem was of the greatest moment from the
national standpoint, for, with the exception of agri-,
culture, there was no industry of such far-reaching
importance as that connected with the production and
utilisation of coal. It was the business of all, there-
fore, to take an active interest in any methods for the
conservation of our rapidly depleting coal reserves.
Coal lay at the very basis of all our industries, and
everything pointed to the fact that it was likely to
remain the chief source of all artificial heat, light,
and power for some considerable time to come. It
was true that for some purposes oil had recently been
used, but it did not seem probable that its use would
become sufficiently general to make it a serious rival,
in spite of the advantages it possessed in certain cases;
while there were indications that, even if the supply
were sufficient to enable it to be used for all purposes
for which coal is now used, the resources of oil would
be depleted at a much greater rate than the coal
supplies. That the oil engine had come to say, there
was not much doubt; but even Dr. Diesel had stated
that it must ultimately depend upon coal, from the
distillation of which it would derive its motive power.

Within recent years developments of new coal fields
had shown such a marked decrease that there was
some reason to think that we had practically reached
the zenith in the exploitation of our resources,
although statements differed somewhat; and, indeed,
estimates were of little value unless they showed our
position regarding available supplies and probable
cost of production compared with other countries. The
cost of production was the crux of the whole question.
The world’s total estimated reserves of coal within
2,000 yds. of the surface, 7,400,000 million tons in all,
were distributed thus:—United States reserves, 51-8;
Canada, 16-4; China, 13-5; Germany, 5-7; Great
Britain, 2-6; Siberia, 2-5; Australia, 2-2; and other
countries, 5-5; the figures for the British Empire being
23*4 per cent. From the figures relating to the
average annual production over quinquennial periods
from 1900 to the outbreak of war for the three chief
coal producing countries — the United States, Great
Britain, and Germany—it could be deduced that the
output of the United States was increasing at a com-
pound interest rate of 6 per cent., Germany at 4 per
cent., and Great Britain at 2 per cent.; and it could
be estimated that Germany would have overtaken us
in 20 years from now, when the output of both
countries would be about 420 million tons per annum.
If the tables dealing in detail with the figures were
studied closely, it was evident that we could only con-
serve our supplies at the expense of our commercial
position, for at the present time the United States
had nine times more and Germany one and a half
times per head of population than we have. The
second point to be considered was the question of price,
for it mattered not what supplies there might be,
unless such coal could be obtained and made avail-
able at a price which would enable our industries to
compete with other countries. In this connection, it
was to be noticed that in Great Britain in 1886 the
price at the pitmouth was 4s. lOd. per ton, and in the
United States 6s. 4}d.; but in 1912 the price in Great
Britain was 9s. Ofd. per ton at the pitmouth, whereas
in the United States it was only 6s. Id. The annual
production per person in Great Britain in 1886-1890
was 312 tons ; in 1911, 260 tons; and in 1912 (the strike
year), 244 tons; the figures in relation to the United
States for the corresponding periods being respec-
tively 403 tons, 600 tons, and 613 tons. It was diffi-
cult to say how much of this reduction was due to the
greater depths, and how much was due to labour pro-
blems ; but both had produced their effects.

He further pointed out that, whilst the price of coal
had been gradually growing, the production per
person had been rapidly decreasing; and, as in the near
future we should be compelled to tackle the thinner
seams and those lying at greater depths to maintain
our output, there was not much doubt that the price
would continue to increase.

The question naturally arose as to what we could do
to ease the position. Speaking generally, there were
two courses open to us. We must either greatly
restrict our exports, which amounted to one-third of
our total production, by re-imposing the export tax;
or reduce waste in what we retained ourselves.
Economists said that the former plan was outside the
realm of practical economics, since our wealth lay in
selling our coal and not allowing it to remain
unwrought until the home demand necessitated its
extraction. Further, the cheapness with which we
were able to obtain the raw materials from other
countries for many of our industries depended on our
export of coal, since the majority of the ships which
brought corn, sugar, cotton, wood, wool, etc., carried
coal as ballast, and therefore at a cheap rate, on the
outward journey. The reduction of waste in what we
actually retained for ourselves would seem to provide a
more practical solution, and certainly merited
priority of attention, for there was no doubt that a
colossal amount of waste had been going on. In the
first place, we must find out exactly how we stood in
regard to the quantities available and the particular
qualities each kind of coal possesses. Next, we must
direct attention to appliances whereby the coal might
be worked to the greatest advantage, i.e., to methods
of mining for getting all the coal at a minimum cost
of production and with the maximum of safety to the
miner. Finally, we must rely, to a much greater
extent than in the past, on those methods which
science could give to utilise coal to the fullest possible
extent.

Discussing sources of waste, Prof. McMillan pointed
out that from 10 to 15 per cent, of the coal mined was
left in the mine, either because it was slack, or was
of a somewhat poorer quality, and did not pay. A
large amount was also left as barriers between mineral
properties and as pillars for surface support or for
roof support in the mine, and these, together with the
small coal, had been estimated at something like 30
million tons per annum. There was, however, every
likelihood that the great strides contemplated in the
coking industry, in gas manufacture, and in the
manufacture of patent fuels, would provide outlets at
a very early date for a large proportion of this coal,
and as there was not likely then to be the same dis-
tinction between round coal and slack as has existed
up to the present, the price obtained for the latter
would be such that colliery owners w’ould see to it that
every available pound was brought to the surface. Of
the total approximately of 200 million tons of coal
used in various industries, it had recently been stated
that about 80 million tons were used in the production
of motive power, and that at least one-half of this
w’as wasted annually. The Coal Conservation Sub-
Committee of the Ministry of Reconstruction had
recommended installing large central electric power
stations at or near the source of the coal itself. This
would undoubtedly lead to great economy, and would
also reduce very considerably the cost of railway
transit. In 1913 the average cost of coal per ton at
the pitmouth was 10s. 14d., and in some cases the con-
sumer had to pay as much as 31s. It had been esti-
mated that if the methods which he had outlined were
adopted, no less than 55 million tons of coal would be
saved annually, or sufficient, were it used for the pro-
duction of further power, to generate continuously 15
million horse-power. As regards the great waste of
coal in open domestic fires, one possible solution lay
in carbonising the coal, with extraction of by-products,
and working up the resultant solid residue into a
patent fuel. It had not been conclusively proved,
however, except in one or two isolated instances, that
this could be economically accomplished generally,
although there were indications of it being done in the
near future with a sufficiently large quantity to effect
considerable economy. Attempts had also been made,
and plants were at present in course of erection, for
distilling the coal at a low temperature, and to obtain
a residue of semi-coke, which, without further treat-
ment, could be used in the domestic grate. In this
process a sufficient amount of the volatile constituents
was left in the coke itself to overcome the difficulty of
ignition, and the coke had been found to be admirably
suited for domestic consumption, though it was too
brittle to stand transport. Still another remedy, and
one which offered great possibilities, was the substitu-
tion of gas for coal, on the lines which had been
in operation on the north-east coast for several years,
where the ‘surplus gas from the coke ovens had been
extensively used, and one town in the area benefited
to the extent of £30.000 per annum. Still another
method was to use a mixture of coal and coke, which,
when used in suitable proportions, gave excellent
results. It would seem, therefore, that one of the
most important means at our disposal for effecting
economies in coal consumption generally lay in dis-
tilling the coal at a low or a high temperature, accord-
ing to the nature of the coal itself, and upon the
quantity and quality of the bv-products derived, and
then utilising these and the solid residue to the fullest
possible extent.

It must not be assumed, however, that the solution
of the problem of coal economy lay wholly in carboni-
sation, and that consequently all coal should be coked
for one or other of these purposes. But if we were
going to be independent of other countries for such
products, and also develop the industry for export pur-
poses, we could afford to carbonise a great deal more
than in the past.

PARLIAMENTARY INTELLIGENCE.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—February 25.
Canal Traffic.

Col. Yate asked whether any steps were being taken to
develop the canal traffic between the ports of Bristol and
Liverpool, on the west coast, and London.

Mr. Wardle renlied that the Canal Control Committee
had specially considered the matter. He was advised that
under present conditions the routes mentioned were not
capable of any great development. Everything possible
was being done.

Notice Regarding Removals. — The Controller of Coal
Mines desires to remind all persons intending to remove
that they will not be able to obtain supplies of coal, coke,
etc., for their new address unless : (a) they have sent a
notice of their intended removal to the local coal overseer
of the district in which the premises which are being given
up are situated, giving particulars of the new address to
which they intend to remove ; (b) they send a requisition
for coal supplies in respect of their new address to the
local coal overseer for the district through their coal mer-
chant.

Embargo on Swedish Coal Tar.—As from January 14,
1918, an embargo has been imposed, by Royal Decree, on
all stocks of coal tar and other tar produced from fossil
substances by dry distillation, and of mixtures of coal tar
and wood tar produced at gas works in the distillation of
wood. The Decree orders that returns shall be made of
stocks in hand amounting to a barrel, or 200 kilogs., or
more. Exemptions from the embargo are provisionally
made as regards (1) stocks held by industries, if the goods
are to be employed for the purpose of carrying on manu-
facture; and (2) stocks sold to purchasers approved by the
Industrial Commission. The chief object of these regula-
tions is presumably to put a stop to jobbing transactions
in tar (says the Board of Trade Journal). As regards
wood tar, it should be mentioned that gas works in Sweden,
owing to the shortage of coal, are now using a mixture of
coal gas and wood gas. The Stockholm Gas Works, for
example, supply gas containing an admixture of from 40 to
50 per cent, of wood gas.