Frostburg mining journal. [volume] (Frostburg, Md.) 1871-1913, 1876-02-12
The "Freezing Out Policy''-A Defence
Of the Consolidation Coal COMPANY.

Mr.. Editor Il have read with great IN
terest several editorial articles recently ap-
pearing in the Engineering and Mining
Journal under the heading of-"The Con-
solidation Coal Company and its "Freezing
Out Policy" do not desire to provoke
controvers." by assailing those companies
who are backing the articles referred to;
hence, l shall content myself with brief
review of statistics SO that "all whom it
may concern" the miners of Georges
Creek more. especially, may see the neces-
sty of more enlightened statements and
fairer conclusions than the paper referred
TO has yet given.
The company which we undertake to de-
fend is the one which has maintained the
price of mining and now declines to coop
crate i'll the measure to reduce it 20 per
cent, and this course is impugncd on the
ground that it mines its coal at loss which
is compensated by profits drawn through
its railway tonnage from competing COM
panies. This charge is ably and ingenious
ly set forth and, without offset, is liable to
the great credit which naturally attaches to
the utteranccs of an cnterprising and infiu-
cntial class journal. But we shall see il
the Consolidation Coal Company is not
right in maintaining the price of mining
Frostburg and Georges Creek coal when
and where other companies declare laryer
dividends nith0m railroad!
The Engineering and Mining journal as
srrts that the Consolidation Coal Company
mined coal in 1873 at an actual loss. In
that year coal sold at $4.6O per ton, while
during last year the price varied between
1870 and $40 averaging, probably, $685.,
or IS cents per ton less than 1878 And
just here it is proper to state on undoubted
authority that the Consolidation Company
mines its coal AS cheap if not cheaper than
any company in the Georges Creek region.
Assuming these bases, and we think the
records sustain them, how is it to be ex-
planned that the Maryland Coal Company
without railroad, and paying all expenses,
heavy frcights included, realizes net profit
of $s7 ,134.44, or II per cent of the par
value OF its stock? Then, taking the En-
Gtneering and Inning Journals figures, let
us suppose the Maryland Company lost IS
cents er ton for 1875. We find its pro-
duction to be 261 300 tons, cntailing total
loss of $195,9Sl ; add salaries, etc, $3O,O27.-
10, end we have grand total loss of $22G,-
| 0OS.75. Then let us know how it realizes
II per cent, or 81 per cent. more than the
i company which, it is alleged, is trying to
"fccZc' it out!
Now, as to the charge of extravaganza,
or waste, at the mines. TO say the least,
this is un ust. Aside from the well known
economy which marks all the Consolida-
ton Company's operations in this region,
l know from personal observation, its mines
are worked as cleaply and scientifically as
any others in this section. Under the con-
slant, practical and faithful supervision of
| the Superintendent, Mr.. James 3. Thomas
1T is certain that the management of the
mines have been equal to the best. If any
| further attestation of this fact were want
| ing it may he seen in the following extract
from The Coal Mines" an Interesting
book just published by Andrew R"y, State
Inspector OF Mines of Ohio With regard
to the method OF mining the Consolidation
Conipanys COAL MIR. Roy, who is practi-
cal miner and Il keen and intelligent OBJ
server, says:
This plan Of working the Great Vein coal
Is beyond all question the best whit h has
yet been applied in the Cumberland coal
| region. The galleries OF the mine will
stand firm for one hundred years, and may
| be used for hauling coal underground for a
distance OF twenty miles should the occasion
| arise requiring it, Besides, u greater
amount OF coal will be got from tile same
mine-there can be little or no losses from
crushed lpilars. With proper care four
tifihs OF the coal may be recovered
! Now, Mr.. Editor, two questions with re-
gard to the freezing out policy" Is it IA
lional to suppose the Consolidation Coal
Company is endeavorng to absorb other
coal properties in this region by forcing
them to mine their Coal at loss and thus
into ultimate abandonment of coal pro,luc.
ton, when the fact is patent these proper
ties, without railroad revenues are realizing
from 2 to 81 per cent. more profit than the
freezing out" comp ny? This same com
pany, 1t is known, owns about three fOurths
OF 'hc coal lands of this county, and has s
many mines open and running as the de
mand warrants; then what sort OF policy"
is it that would freeze" its competitors
"out" of their property, lose interest and
pay heavy taxes on additional and relative
Iy unproductive Investments
In matter of reduction, therefore,
there seems to be no substantial pretext for
its enforcement. Despite tie stringency of
the times, the prevailing depression of man
ufacturing interests, and strong competition,
the coal production for 1875 sustained a
falling off of but three per cent. from the
output of 1874. If,he price Of mining must
be reduced, why not say 3 per cent. instead
of %? But if %, where does the other 20
per cent, wrested from the miners, 90? A
reduction of B per cent. will place the COM
panies on the footing held in 1874, allowing
the demand to be equal.
The intelligent miner will see what com.
pany is maintaining his wages. have
Shpw1, nlaiplv that ntI,on