The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1873-10-11 00:00:00

DEAR COAL.

In London, on Monday night, Professor Leone Levi lectured
at King's College on the Interesting &abjects summed up
under the title of "The Influence of the High Price of Coal
on the Productive I nduatry of the United Kingdom." The
following report of the lecture is from The Times
Ia the opening part of his discourse the Profeseor
pointed out that it was not • principle in this country to
hoard our great mineral productions, and he said
It would be a dire calamity, not only for
this country but for the whole world, if the Eng-
lish coal supply were suddenly to cease or te
be so high in price as to be practically unattainable.
He then proceeded to inquire as to the cause of
the rapid increase in the price of coals—an increase of
80 or 100 per cent —whether the increase was per-
manent or temporary, and the effect upon the rise
tudon our industry. The value of anything was deter
mmed by the two distinct elements of utility and
difficulty of production, awl, applying these elements
to coal, he pointed out that the utility was universal,
but that its attainment or 'Production could not
be held to be so great. He reviewed the con-
clusions of the Royal Commissioners on our 'coal
supply" that the probable qusntity of coal in our
ascertained fields amounted to ninety thousand mil.
lions of tons, and that if we went deeper, under the
Ferman, new red sandstone and the other super-
incumbent strata, otill at workable depths, we should
get fifty thousand millions of tone more. Even making
allowance for increasing consumption by an inrea-
sing population, there MN coal enough to last 360
years, while if the consumption should not increase
the supply would last four times as long. As to the
nausea of the increase of price, it was impossible to say
how much this has been the result of the needless alarm
given by the coalownere by proposals to limit the
supply, by their resisting the just demands of the
miners, and by keeping stocks at a minimum.
The late Commilee of the House of Commons
saw no reason to believe that any effort had been
made by coalowners to restrict the supply, and so
create artificially a scarcity in the market, but the
Committee threw upon the workmen the burden of
having used means to prevent the output of coal in
order to create a scarcity which would maintain • high
rate of wages. The Professor doubted very much the
accuracy of the conclusions of the Committee, and he
was inclined to thick that both coal mine owners and
miners were at fault, and that the efforts of the work
men to improve their position were as nothing com-
pared to the ready disposition of the coalowners
1 and merchants to make hay while the sun lasted.
In proof of this view he pointed out that, while
the men's wages had advanced by 62 per cent., the
price of coal had advanced from what it was at the
pit's mouth nearly 500 per cent, and though the
owners said they were recouping themselves for losses
of production over previous years, it must be said that
tinder any circumstances the owners had benefited
more than the workmen by the raising of prices. With
respect to these combinations, he maintained that the
time bad gone for passing laws against combinations on
the part of the men, or attempts to interfere on the part
of the Government with the trade, which he held should
be entirely free and left to depend upon supply and
demand. He then proceeded to show what our depend-
ence on coal amoun ed to, and enumerated the various
sources of coal expenditure, such as 7,000,000 tons in
the raising of 120,000,000 used, then six or seven tons
in the manufacture of each ton of bar iron, then the
expenditure of coal for our steam vowels at sea in
plao• of war and trading sailing vow* than the

-railways, the shammy engines in manufactures,
and the gee namsdaeture Of all the coal raised
76 per am& went for manufactures, 15 per oent, foe
domestic parposesiand 10 for export, but of the
so
latter item half lit be said to be for British par.
poses, as much of e coal sent out went to coaling
stations for British ships or to our crolonies. Referring
to the proposal to place a heavy export duty on coal to
prevent its exportation, he deprecated strongly the
suggestion as both inexpedient and ineffective, as, for
one thing, it would give offence to foreign nations, who
would retaliate. Then, if the rise in price from 20a
to 40.. had not stopped the export a few shillings duty
would not, and, for another thing, we should be starv-
ing our own shipping. It might be that other coon.
tries would produce coal at the enhanced price in place
of taking from us, but he regarded it as right that
our minis should be open to the world just as we
asked other countries to give us their productions.
The remedy for the dear coal he considered would
be found in opening up new mines, and in employing
ooal.cutting machines, for these means, he said, would
save us from the oombinations of those engaged
In the trade, and especially from the caprices of mine
owners and merchants. Then he asked whether it was
likely the demand was likely to continue or in.
crease. While the mineral remained at its present
price he believed the demand would not increase, but
would soon greatly diminish both for manufacturing 1
and domestic purposes—the two great sources of con.
inunption. Already the export of iron was reduced to
an extent which represented a lessened consumption of 1
coal used in iron manufacture to the amount of
2,000,000 tons, and this decreme of the manufacture
of iron would continue, to the great laving of
coal, for no more iron would be used than was
absolutely necessary while the price continued high.
Even if our exports of iron remained as they
were, there would be a diminished consumption of coal
amounting to 10,000,000 tons • year, and, taking with
this increased supply from new mine., and new cutting
machines, he looked forward to • diminished price with
hope. As to the effect of • high price of coal upon the
industry of the country, he pointed out that there '
was scarcely anything now which was not produced
by the aid of this wonderful agent, even to agricul-
ture, and that therefore this was • most important
consideration. As coal entered very largely into
the coat of the production of iron, of Mires its high
price affected that industry immediately and directly.
Then, in the burning of lime, there was • heavy cost
for fuel, so the building trade was affected. The
earthenware trades, too, were largely affected by the
price of coal. The wool and cotton textile trades were
not so largely affected, but they wers in a degree, and
as the coat of an item added to the cost of production,
so the buying value was increased. These additional
eons added to the difficulties the British manufac-
turer had in maintaining himself against the
competition he everywhere met, and they lessened
the di+tance in the met of production which gave
British goods the advantage over foreign goods. Even
now, but for the folly of the French in undertaking
the last war, our cost of production would have been
equal to theirs. We had all these dangers to avoid-
but
then, on the other hand, it must be remembered
that if we had strikes and heightened wages, so had
other countries,, so that, perhaps, we were equal.
Still, it was important we should keep our productive
and trading supremacy, and the means to this and the
limitation of our expenditure of coal and the finding of
some other motive power would conduce. With regardto
foreign competition he considered we had not much to
fear, for American iron and coal were too far apart to
be brought or manufactured against us, and, moreover,
the genius of the people as yet was against mining.
Then Switzerland, though elle had low wages, and
though a large portion of her motive power was gra-
tuitous, being water, could not compete with us in
textile manufacture, her position being against her.
So with other countries. But, he said, though
heightened prime might only have kept pace with the
increased means of nations, yet as masses of the peoples
could only afford to buy the lowest forms of food and
clothing, the nation should rest Its position upon its
power to produce cheaply. This was to be done by
Improved machinery, economy in hand labour, and the
discovery and use of other and cheaper motive powers
than coal. He urged that mills should use water power
In place of steam, and said that even the waves of the
sea around our island—an immense and unused force—
might be used as servants and as means of saving our
coal, Ile went on to urge how necessary it was that
our population should not be stinted in the supply
for domestic purposes, and d Alt upon the importance
of this by contrasting the working powers of the inha-
bitants of these isles with other nationalities, and by
showing that warmth in winter was necessary to the
maintenance of these powers. In conclusion, he
pressed upon cnilowners and miners the necessity of
their avoiding, for the common good of their country,
the strikes, lock-outs, and combinations which lira
raised the price of this necessary mineral, and thus
materially added to the difficulties of the community.

In a note, on Wednesday, The new says

' Professor Leone Levi wishes no to state that it was the
profits of coalowners, not the price of coal, which he de-
scribed in his Kiiig's Ccileg. lecture aa having alvanced ICO
per cost, the difference between Vie ccet of producing coal
at the pit's heed and the selling price being 7d, per ton in
1871, while it Is now IL6d."