I have repeatedly referred to America, because there is no disguising the fact that there lie some of the secrets of our failure, and a glance in conclusion at some of their achievements may be calculated to spur us ahead. The following figures dwarf British practice. Three steam-shovels mine 5,000 tons of ore, and load it into 50 tons trucks in 10 hours; and 2,000 of these shovels will do the work of 4,000,000 men. The ore is carried in train-loads of 4,000 tons at d. per mile, and a vessel of 6,000 to 7,000 tons is loaded in 10 hours. The cargo is discharged, and the steamer is bunkered and ballasted in 10 hours, or the ore may be dumped from the trucks into huge storage-docks holding 40,000 tons, from which a 7,000 tons steamer can be loaded in 3 hours: indeed the record is 5,000 tons in hour. The cost of loading or discharging such a vessel is about d. per ton, and the whole operation is effected by automatic machinery. The ore is as expeditiously stocked on the ground, or in storage-bins at the furnaces, by travelling-bridge tramways, 300 to 400 feet long, and 70 feet overhead, operated electrically, and one man can handle 2,000 tons a day. Two or three men will attend to the machinery delivering the ore, coke and limestone to the blast-furnace, and 400 to 600 tons of iron per day will be run from each blast-furnace. At the Carnegie works, the No. 3 Carrie blast-furnace has made in one day 790 tons of basic open-hearth iron. From the blast-furnace, the molten metal is taken to the steel-plant through the mixer, converter, blooming-mills and rolls, and is turned out as finished steel in practically one heat. From one works with two mills, 2,914 tons of finished rails have been made per day. At another, 2,000 tons of plates, and at another 3,500 tons of girders; while from another works, as a small detail, 600 tons of rods were turned out for wire-nails; and if you want nails, the Ensley works with 171 machines will turn out 1,500 tons a day. In 10 years, the output of pig-iron has doubled, and finished products has trebled. The output of pig-iron per man has increased in 10 years by 29 per cent. and of finished iron and steel by 37 per cent. In 1900, and here is the main point, the average output of pig-iron per man per annum employed at blast-furnaces in the United States was 354 tons, and at the Duquesne works, it was no less than 1,300 tons. Canada, too, is forging ahead; she has outgrown her own PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS. demand and is producing 20 times the amount of iron that she did 5 years ago. Two years ago, the Dominion Steel Company laid their first brick; their blast-furnaces have turned out already 10,000 tons, and they have now a plant with a capacity of 500,000 tons a year. Germany has proceeded much on the same lines. Blast-furnaces turning out 400 to 500 tons a day are becoming the rule; they concentrate their plant, own their own coal-mines, oremines and coke-works, get their ore and handle it by machinery on a great scale, take their iron direct to the steel-plant, the whole power being derived from the waste furnace-gases. The result of this enterprise is that their output per man has trebled in 20 years. These are some of the conditions that we have to meet in our fight for trade. Mr. Schwab says that they must export their surplus, and to keep prices up at home they will sell that surplus at a loss rather than decrease production. It is calculated that Alabama foundry-iron can be delivered, now, as ballast in our cotton-ships, at Manchester for 50s. per ton and will shortly be delivered at 10s. less, and New Jersey iron at Liverpool at 44s. per ton. With their 24,000,000 tons capacity, and the new blastfurnaces building for several millions more, we shall need to watch vigilantly if times of depression come and demand falls off. There may be something in the American argument that combinations expand trade and create new revenues by reducing the cost of its commodities. This indeed appears to be borne out by the fact that the consumption of iron and steel is five times. greater per head of population in America than the average of other countries, but the danger of over-production seems ominously threatening. If we can compete in raw material, we need not despair of finished products and we are nearer to the European, Eastern and Southern markets than our Transatlantic competitors. We have still large supplies of ore at home, and Spanish and other ore, nearer than is the American ore to their furnaces, but we must keep up to date if we would still remain ahead. Reform must be initiated quickly and vigorously, for we have scarcely as yet realized the rapidity of the progress of our rivals. calls for men of alert mind, abundant energy and scientific training, with a grasp of every aspect of the question. It is true that The crisis many of their works are new while ours are old, but that is the very reason why we should scrap our plant and rebuild our works on modern lines. It will not pay in some instances, and here again is the need for men of great discrimination and ability, but in other instances it will pay to do it thoroughly and expeditiously. The fittest must survive, and the battle must be to the strong. Edison recently said that if Great Britain would wake up to American competition, the result would be the greatest battle of wits that the world had ever seen. Then by all means let us give the world the spectacle. Members of this and kindred societies will be called upon, and will do a big share of the fighting. We have the sinews of war; the bed-rock of sterling national qualities that gave us our world supremacy is still our inheritance, and I fully believe that in the long and tough struggle ahead of us, Britain once fairly roused will more than hold her own against the world. Mr. E. B. WAIN moved a vote of thanks to the President for his address. Mr. W. N. ATKINSON, in seconding the motion, observed that the address struck the imagination, and should spur the exertions of all who had to do with the production of coal and iron in this country. He was not himself inclined to draw very positive conclusions from comparisons made of work done in different countries. What was wanted in this country more than anything else was that scientific education should be brought to bear upon the management of coal- and iron-works. The motion was cordially approved. THE NORTH OF ENGLAND INSTITUTE OF MINING AND MECHANICAL ENGINEERS. GENERAL MEETING. HELD IN THE WOOD MEMORIAL HALL, NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE, SIR LINDSAY WOOD, BART., PRESIDENT, IN THE CHAIR. The SECRETARY read the Minutes of the last General Meeting. and reported the proceedings of the Council at their meetings on August 16th, September 27th and that day. The SECRETARY also reported the proceedings of the Council of The Institution of Mining Engineers. The following gentlemen were elected, having been previously nominated :- MEMBERS MR. JOHN BOLAND ATKINSON, H.M. Inspector of Mines, 2, Devonshire Terrace, Newcastle-upon-Tyne. MR. ALFRED QUINTIN CARNEGIE, Engineer, 21, Eldon Place, Newcastleupon-Tyne. MR. CHARLES CROFTON, Engineer, 17, Albany Gardens, Whitley, R.S.O., Northumberland. MR. PERCY H. JONES, Colliery Manager, Snatchwood Park, Pontypool, Monmouthshire. MR. ROBERT RUTHERFORD, Colliery Manager, Axwell Park Colliery, MR. HERBERT KILBURN SCOTT, Consulting Mining Engineer, Clun House, MR. WILLIAM SMITH, Mine Manager, The Buffelsdoorn Estate and Goldmining Company, Limited, Klerksdorp, Transvaal. MR. JOHN WHITFIELD THOMSON, Mining Manager, General Manager, Ashanti Proprietary Gold-mines, Limited, c/o Messrs. A. Miller Brothers, Axim, Gold Coast, West Africa. ASSOCIATE MEMBERS MR. GEORGE MAITLAND EDWARDS, 24, De Vere Gardens, West Kensington, MR. OSWALD W. ELLIS, 31, Grosvenor Place, Newcastle-upon-Tyne. ASSOCIATES MR. JOHN ESKDALE, Assistant Mechanical Engineer, Ashington Colliery, MR. WILLIAM James Knight, Engineer's Draughtsman, 12, Wolmerhausen MR. PERCY EDMUND SMALLWOOD, Back-overman, Chopwell Colliery, Lintz MR. JAMES Wallace, Gold-miner, c/o West African Union Mines, Adjah STUDENT MR. JOHN EDWARD RALPH HERRISON, Mechanical Engineering Apprentice, DISCUSSION OF MR. FRED C. KEIGHLEY'S PAPER ON "COKE-MAKING AT THE OLIVER COKE-WORKS."* Mr. A. L. STEAVENSON (Durham) said that the coke-ovens described were of the old type of bee-hive ovens similar to those working on the Quayside, Newcastle-upon-Tyne in 1765, and which he himself had described to the members of the Institute in 1860. Mr. T. Y. Greenert appeared to agree that the 12 feet coke-oven described by Mr. Keighley was an improvement on the practice in the North of England of erecting 11 feet ovens. He (Mr. Steavenson) differed from Mr. Greener on that point, for if the ovens were 12 feet, and the drawers had to work with drawing-rakes sufficient to reach to the back of the oven, they became exceedingly heavy and awkward to move, and one of the first results would be that the workmen would demand an increase of 1d. or 2d. per oven. In his experience, a coke-oven 11 feet in diameter was about the best dimension to adopt. In building the ovens described by Mr. Keighley, no space appeared to have been left between them; and, consequently, there was no room for the expansion of the ovens, which would eventually mutually destroy each other. Mr. Greener pointed out that it was wrong * Trans. Inst. M.E., 1901, vol. xxii., page 493; and vol. xxiii., page 485. |