The Evening Star SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 27, 1873

Evening Star, Issue 3309, 27 September 1873, Page 2

The Evening Star SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 27, 1873

The accounts received from Great Britain from time to time tell of the heavy rise in the price of coal, to account for which various theories have been put forward. Exhaustion of coal, mines, increased expense in working the pits, through having to draw the coal from greater depths, rise of wages, and other circumstances have each been mentioned. Probably each of these circumstances lias had its influence, but the most potent agent has proved to he the enormously increased demand. This has been established beyond doubt by the labors of a committee appointed by the British Government to investigate the matter ; the report of which shows conclusively that the rise is due in great measure to the vast increase in the demand for the purposes of the iron trade. The evidence of Mr Lowthianßell, president for the year of the Iron and Steel Institute at Home, is to the effect that “ while there has been a great development in iron and chemical works, there has not been a corresponding development in coal mining.” The favorite idea with many ( was that the rise was the result of combination on the part of the coal owners ; but there does not appear to be a shadow of reason lor it; the much more natural cause, of demand exceeding supply, is sufficient to account for it. Some very interesting statistics, furnished by Mr Bell, fully sustain his opinion on the matter, and present a striking picture of the growth of the iron trade Forty years ago there was not a factory on the banks of the Tees, and coal was supplied in unlimited quantities to the works on the Tyne at so low a price as Is fid per ton. It was not until 1850 or 1853 that the price began to rise, in consequence of the growth of the factories ■ but since then the amount of coal consumed by them increased to a million and a-quar-ter tons in 1861, and three millions and

a-quartcr in 1871. The discovery of Cleveland iron stone has been the chief cause of the increased demand, and Middlesbrough represents the consequent trade. Before 1850 the tons of pig-iron made in a year wore 110,000. In 1871 the pig-iron manufactured amounted to 1,695,377 tons, and Mr Bell believes that in 1872 it approached 2,000,000 tons. The number of puddling furnaces has within the same period multiplied from 250 to at least 1,650.” These figures of themselves suffice to account for a large portion of the increased consumption, but it appears that in addition to the increase of iron works, the proportion of coal employed in manufacturing iron has largely increased. Thus “in 1861 the quantity of coal raised in the Northumberland and Durham districts was nearly 20,000,000 tons, and the quantity consumed by the iron works ■was about 11 per cent, of the total. But in 1872, while the amount of coal raised had only increased to 29,000,000 tons, the proportion required for the iron works had increased to 28 per cent. Taking the Durham coalfield alone, the proportion of coal used in the iron works was 47 per cent, last year. In that year, moreover, while production fell off half a million tons, the consumption in the iron trade increased by more than half a million. Coal was taken overland from South Wales, and for once was actually ‘carried to Newcastle.’ But other industries requiring coal have also been unusually developed.” All manufactures have been nourishing, as, for example, alkali works; and much is due to the extension of railways and the substitution of steam for wind as the motive power for ships. Some of the skilled witnesses considered that high as Mr Bell’s estimate appeared of the quantity of coal used in the manufacture of iron, he had somewhat understated it. His statement was that 5 £ tons are required to produce a single ton of bar iron ; but Mr Bennett Aitken estimates the quantity needed at 6 tons 7 cwt. Both agree, however, that 40,000,000 tons annually are consumed in the manufacture of pig iron. The “ English Mechanic, ” from which we derive our information, concludes that the only remedy for the high prices is to economise the use of coal or increase the supply. But there are obstacles to both, and especially to the latter proposition. Short hours of labor have led to restriction of production and raising wages. It said in fact that such has been the effect of restricting labor in the face of increasing demand, that some men earn 75 per cent, more than they did when they worked longer hours. But even this will not account for more than a rise of about 2s a ton. The conclusion some are ready to draw from these circumstances is, that the export trade of Great Britain must suffer, yet sucK does not appear to be the case. The coalfields of Europe are very restricted, and though in America there is abundance and much of it of fine quality, iron is supplied from Great Britain at a lower price than the Americans can produce it, notwithstanding the United States endeavors to induce Heme manufacture by a restrictive duty of 50s a ton on rails, and freight and insurance amount to 25s a ton. “ Our manufacturers,” says the English Mechanic, “ therefore, are handicapped with <£3 15s on every ton of rails ; yet, notwithstanding this, the United States are still our best market for that manufacture.” The article from which we quote points to the danger of losing this supremacy in iron through the high wages earned by the colliers. We do not suppose the warning will be heeded by men who seek to earn as much money in as short a time as possible, and since the tendency of the present day is to equalise wages throughout the world, we are inclined to think there is little to fear on that ground. Remembering what Dr Featiiekston said of wages in the coal districts of Woles, the paper from which we quote gives confirmation of it. [The telegrams received by this mail tell of 100 tons of United States iron being imported into England. Is this a warning note ?]