Frostburg mining journal. [volume] (Frostburg, Md.) 1871-1913, 1875-05-29
The Mining COntrOyersy-Lettcr from
John Douglas, Sr.

LoNACoNING, Mp, MAY 26, 1915.
Editor Mining Journal:
SIR-My object in writing the Inspector
of Mines in Ohio was not meant as a criti-
cism of his report, as he states, but in vndi-
cation of those whom he had, | believe mis-
takcnly eensured, 1t must have been evil
dent to many readers of that report that Mr..
Roy had based his censure on the old falla-
cy of fourteen feet and its product, as given
by Prof Hodge. Had Mr. Roy confined
himself to what he actually knew from the
most of his experience, instead of fourteen,
he would have given nine feet, and nowhere
ten. The isolated case of Hampshire mine
is pointed to as his proof. did not know
before that that mine was in Maryland.
But we will admit that the vein is said to be
fourteen feet thick in that mine, while we
confess it is hard to believe all that is said
regarding that mine as to the thickness of
the vein, Its frccness from slate, etc. But
this we affirm, that about the year 1854, the
writer of this, at the request of Mr.. w. III,
Creek Coal & Iron Company, measured the
thickness of this vein at this place and at
Hampshire mine, and at the Swanton mine,
the latter being the most central mine then
opened, and nowhere did it exceed twelve
feet two inches.
But all this has nothing to do with the
accusation that we are wasteful in our
mode, and criminal in our manner ofmining
This Mr.. Roy evidently means to modify by
saying My structures referred wholly to
the waste in mining" and then he falls back
on that magnificent three feet of bottom
coal left untouched. If Mr.. Roy knows
anything of this (Which he certainly does, J
he must know that that three feet of bottom
differs in condition at the northern end of
the basin from what it is in Georges Creek
as much as the said vein differs in thickness
at the same points.
But apart from this statement let me in
form some of your correspondents that we
along this creek are not SOY very prodlgal of
our means as they would make it appear,
for this said bottom coal was endeavorcd to
be shipped as satisfactory article by the
Georges Creek Coal & Iron Company, the
Maryland Coal Company, the Piedmont,
the Swanton Coal Company, and, | have no
doubt, others, but abandoned AT whose
order: Not by that of the superintendent
and boss miners But it is considered by
the owners as unfit for commercial pur-
poses-tEe very parties who are best fitted
to judge of its fitness, and whose fiat on
the rroprtties of mining could not be al
tered by the best showings of the most en-
inent ofy your correspondents. Yet Mr.. Roy
does not blame these operators as criminal
but feelingly wonders they permit it, as it
only contains 'two thin layers of slate, east,
ly separated with a little care and trouble, y
while the fact remains that the Bottom coal
in Georges Creek has four States And at
this moment the not very pleasant recolo c.
ton is brought to our memory that it has
more than two somewhere else. In Georges
Creek two of these states have four inches
of coal between them which cannot be sep.
arated, only as possibility, nor can any OF
them, unless rendering the coal anything
but merchantahle.