The Birmingham age-herald., 1913-07-01

| more than 81 per tom
That Birmingham has as bright future
as any iron district, including Pittsburg,
and Chicago and the corporation must
develop on large scale here was the
optimistic testimony of George G. craw-
| ford, president of the Tennessee Coal,
Iron and Railroad company before the
Steel corporation inquiry in New York.
The complete report of Mr. Crawford's
testimony was received here yesterday.
| Through it all is note of optimism
about Birmingham, which coming from
the source it does, will command immedi-
ate respect in the Birmingham district.
| Mr.. Crawford thinks well of Birming-
ham. He believes strongly in the future
of this district, but he did not hesitate to
say before the Steel corporation inquiry
that rails could be and were made in
| Pittsburg 81 per ton cheaper than they
are made in this district. 1t is we'll known
by those reasonably well acquainted with
Mr.. Crawford that he has believed for
many months that Birmingham was being
made too much over by those who have
| little stakes here He has maintained
time and time again that Birmingham
was decidedly worth while; that the vic
tory was not ready made but must be
achieved by those who have the interests
of Birmingham really close to heart.
| Direct Question Asked
II want to know" said Judge DielSin-
son for the government 'if you think the
future of Birmingham is poor?'
! "The future of Birmingham is as good
| as any other iron district that | know
answered President Crawford
What district do you mean?" he was
asked by the government attorney
| "Pittsburg or Chicago" replied Mr..
Crawford.
Mr.. Crawford apparently from his testi-
mony wished to avoid making the future
of Birmingham too rosy. He is known
to fear the overdrawn figure very much
and prefers to do something and really
| make Birmingham great rather than to
| talk a great deal about what Birmingham
is or is about to be and then fail to make
| good
After Mr.. Crawford asserted that il
costs 50 more to make rails in Birming-
| of the government counsel asked Mr.
| Crawford:
From what you have said you do not
have much faith in the futlre iron and
steel manufacture in Birmingham by the
| Tennessee Coal, Iron and Railroad COM
pany?"
We'll" said Mr.. Crawford slowly and
deliberately. 1t is a low grade PROPOSE
tion and the only way we can save what
is there is to develop it as a low grade
proposition. that is, on large scale
The future of the Birmingham district
is one that cannot be made like the
rosy pictures that l have heard described
but it can develop into a reasonably good
| business proposition"
/ Cost of Rail Making
Mr.. Crawford said the reason it cost 81
more to make steel rail here than in
Pittsburg is because In the latter center
the makers have great quantity of
scrap. He said great supplies In Pitts
burg allow makers to use 40 per cent in
their heats whereas in Birmingham the
Tennessee Coal, Iron and Railroad COM
pany cannot use more than 70 per cent
in its heats.
Again the Tennessee Coal Iron and
Railroad company must get all Its ingot
moulds from the north paying a freight
rate of from $5 to $6 per ton upon them.
| That added to the other fact pointed out
by President Crawford swings the cost in
favor of Pittsburg.
| In his testimony Mr. Crawford told
about the quality of rails made prior to
1907 and then later by the Tennessee Coal
Iron and Railroad company when the
Steel corporation assumed charge. He
said many of the rails sold to the Harri-
man lines In 1907 were defective. The
Hartman line officers ordered deliveries
stopped, he asserted Then In 1909 the
Hartman line officers gave an order to
the Ensley plant after an exhaustive re-
port. study and examination and after
several conferences with Mr.. Crawford,
f.. A. Burr, the sales manager and 9TH
ers. BY May, 1909, MI. Crawford asserted
great changes had been wrought in steel
making at Ensley. He said that 80 per
cent of rail heats were now consumed in
making rails whereas under the old regime
the average was about go per cent to is
per cent. Mr.. Crawford asserted that the
rail cost at the Ensley plant had been
reduced to $40 per ton.
Saving in Coke Production
At the time of acquiring the Tennes-
see Coal Iron and Railroad company
Mr.. Crawford testified that the process
of making coke was by the beehive
ovens, while some was made by the
Semet-Solvay process. Since that time
Mr.. Crawford related that the steel COR
poration had erected the Hopper type
ovens at Fairfield, having an annual out
put of 100000 tons per year. He said
that the use of the new ovens had re-
duced the cost of making coke more than
, 81 per ton.
MFR. Crawford testified that the climate
here was hard on timbers. He said the