loc
Comº, O,
OF THE
Transportation Committee
OF THE
SCRANTON BOARD OF TRADE
ON THE
CHELPER TRINSPORTITION OF THE SMALLER SIZES
OF ANTHRACTE COLL.
AND THE
Wu LUE OF OULM OR ANTHRACTE WASTE
A.S. A.
STEIM PRODUCER.
SCRANTON, PA.

















organized, 1871. *S,
OFFICERS.
WILLIAM T. SMITH, PRESIDENT. -
- * . - THOMAS H. DALE, VICE-PRESIDENT.
A. W. DICKSON, TREASURER.
J. H. FISHER, SECRETARy.
WILLIAM CoNNELL," -
W. H. PERKINs, Trustees.
G. A. FULLER,
CoMMITTEE ON MANUFACTUREs.
William Connell, Chairman, I. A. Finch, E. B. Sturges, Henry
Belin, Jr. J. M. Kemmerer, Luther Keller, Jas. P. Dickson. -
- CoMMITTEE ON LEGISLATION AND TAxEs.
J. H. Torrey, Chairman, J. A. Price, Horace E. Hand,
's Reese G. Brooks, L. N. Kramer. -
- CoMMITTEE ON STREETS AND HIGHWAys.
J. A. Price, Chairman, H. M. Boies, James Matter.
CoMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION.
J. A. Lansing, Chairman, I. F. Megargle, T. H. Dale.
CoMMITTEE ON FINANCE.
- T. C. Snover, Chairman, J. H. Gunster, J . H. Steel.

UNIVERSITY OF chicago |-A D
LIBRARIES 154A-
266892 , S. -
MARCH 1930 - § 4-3
REPORT ON TRANSPORTATION.
To the President and Members of the Scranton Board of Trade :
GENTLEMEN:—In pursuance of a resolution adopted at a regular
meeting of the Board held last March, your committee would
state that it entered at once upon the task of gathering the infor-
mation necessary to make a full report upon the subject of secur-
ing cheaper rates of transportation than now prevail for the smaller
sizes of anthracite coal. The question was a comparatively new
one. Statistics were not easily obtained. The committee held
frequent meetings, Went over, from time to time, the subject mat-
ter acquired, laid out plans for further work, and instructed the
secretary as to what should be done. It soon became apparent
that the New England States offered the best opportunity of study-
ing the changes the trade in coal has undergone during the past
few years, and the efforts of your committee have been almost
entirely in that direction. The result has been to demonstrate
unmistakably that bituminous coal, favored by lower rates of
transportation, is rapidly driving anthracite coal out of the great
manufacturing centres of the New England States, and that the
producers of this section are being discriminated against in their
natural markets. While your committee recognize the fact that
great changes have been and are now taking place in the anthra-
cite coal trade, we do not believe that the trade with New England,
the natural outlet for coal from the vicinity of Scranton, should be
given up without an effort being made to retain it.
Under the instructions given us, the subject was divided into
three distinct heads:
First—The actual state of the trade in steam coals.
Second—Why bituminous coal is cheaper for steam purposes
in the Eastern Middle States and New England than anthracite.
Third—What is the remedy, or how can we regain our lost º
, ground? *. - &
2 REPORT ON TRANSPORTATION.
i
The inquiry separated itself into three branches or sets of
questions: - sº
One to the coal operators of the anthracite region.
One to the manufacturers and coal dealers of New England.
One as to cost and rates of the two kinds of coal.
I.—THE ACTUAL STATE OF THE TRADE IN STEAM COALS.
We first sent out a circular of questions to over one hundred
individual operators and superintendents in the anthracite coal
fields, together with a printed copy of the partial report submitted
to the Board at its meeting in May. The following is the circular:
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY,
SCRANTON, PA., June 1, 1889.
Dear Sir:-Will you kindly give me answers to the following queries:
What is the present ratio of consumption of steam to domestic coal?
What is the ratio of increase in the Western trade as compared with the Eastern ?
How much did the trade in domestic coal fall off last Winter as a result of the mild
season, as compared, for instance, with the preceding Winter, after allowing for the nat-
ural increase of the trade and deducting the regular supply for steam purposes?
We are engaged in the discussion of the coal problem, and will be glad to have you
aid in obtaining facts of interest to all.
• . Very respectfully yours,
J. H. FISHER, SECRETARY.
SCRANTON BOARD OF TRADE, |
Of these one hundred circulars, answers were received from four.
Two of these gave some interesting statistics. One writer says
that 30 per cent. of anthracite goes to make steam. The total pro-
duction last year was 38, I 45,718 tons; 3O per cent. Of this would
be 1 1,443,715 tons. He also said that the trade for the past seven
years showed a difference of 1,250,000 tons between a mild and a
severe winter. In another communication, the same writer says:
“Anthracite suffers a great disadvantage in transportation, either
ratio per mile is too high, or the rate on bituminous is entirely too
low. All anthracite can be handled at much less cost than
bituminous, and we therefore should have the advantage of near
markets.”
Another operator, who has evidentiy made a study of the sub-
ject, furnished valuable statistical tables and charts, which have
been published in the Colliery Engineer and Coal Trade journal. {
From these reports and other data it appears that the average of
pea and buckwheat in the anthracite region is about 20 per cent.
of the anthracite tonnage. This would amount to about 8,oooooo
tons and is nearly equal to the total tonnage of the Clearfield and
REPORT ON TRANSPORTATION. - 3
Cumberland bituminous coal regions. The transportation com-
panies have hardly awakened to the importance of this tonnage,
and the abilities of the collieries to increase the shipments of the
small sizes and save it from the dirt piles. One writer says:
“You will certainly do good service by the investigations you are
making, as outlined in your circular of the IOth. You will do
well to enquire into the change from bituminous to pea and buck-
wheat by steam tugs and other river boats. This has been very
marked, and so long as the anthracite small sizes can be delivered
at low freights there will not be any change back again. There
is also a large consumption of buckwheat by the electric light
companies, and there can be no stronger indorsement of the coal
than its success for this delicate service, the power of lighting
large cities.” - - .
The change taking place in the trade was next examined. In
I880 the total output was 23,437,243 tons. In 1888 it was 38,-
I45,718 tons, an increase of only I 4,708,476 tons. Frederick E.
Saward, in the Coal Trade for 1889, says: “Not many years ago
it was said that the hard coal tonnage doubled in ten years. As
the tonnage grew, the progression was not so great, and then we
came to talk of 5 per cent. yearly increases. Perhaps if the soft
coal output had not increased so largely as it has since 1880, one
might have continued to see the annual growth beyond what it is.
The hard coal is now almost entirely a domestic fuel; the furnace
trade is divided with coke, and the steam trade has gone to soft
or bituminous coal. To show where the steam coal trade has
gone it is only necessary to look at the statistics of the soft coal
production in the districts east of the Alleghenies.”
In 1880 the output was 4,375,000 tons. In 1888 this had in-
creased to 12,250,000 tons, or nearly three times as great in eight
years. The significance of this growth will be better appreciated
when it is remembered that it has almost all gone to supersede
anthracite coal for steam production in the markets of the Eastern
States and that we are losers by nearly that amount.
In 1882 the total output of anthracite coal was 29,120,096 tons,
of which 68.54 per cent., or 19,957,789 tons were used in Penn-
Sylvania, New York and New Jersey; I 7.39 per cent., or 5,064,-
775 tons were consumed in New England. In 1888 Pennsylvania,
New York and New Jersey took 23,053,581 tons, or only 60.44
4. REPORT ON TRANSPORTATION.
per cent. ; New England 6,082,440 tons, or only 15.95 per cent. ;
a loss in six years of 9.54 per cent. of the whole anthracite trade.
Had these States simply held their own we should have sent them
32,778,615 tons last year as against 29, 136,021 tons, a loss of
3,642,594 tons. When it is remembered that 1888 was the most
prosperous the anthracite trade has ever known, and that the out-
put exceeded that of 1887 by over three and a half million tons,
this loss becomes even more significant. These facts are of spec-
ial importance to Scranton because it is the commercial center
of the anthracite coal fields and the output from the district has
increased since 1830 from less than a quarter to considerably
more than a half of the whole in 1888. The New England States
being the natural market for this region a loss of three and a half
million tons a year means a loss of over $6,000,000 a year that
would have been paid out in mining and transporting this coal.
II.—WHY BITUMINOUS COAL IS CHEAPER FOR STEAM PURPOSES IN
THE EASTERN MIDIDLE AND NEW ENGLAND
STATES THAN ANTHRACITE.
The second inquiry was among the manufacturers of New
England, and a circular was prepared as follows: *.
SCRANTON BOARD OF TRADE, \
SCRANTON, PA., July 10, 1889. ſ
Dear Sir :—We are seeking to ascertain if we can compete successfully with bitum-
inous coal with our smaller sizes of prepared anthracite coal such as buckwheat, etc.,
provided they can be transported as cheaply as bituminous, and I have been instructed
by the Board to communicate with some of the leading manufacturers of the Eastern Mid-
dle and New England States, to obtain such facts as we can in regard to the trade in
anthracite and bituminous coals. I therefore address you personally, believing that you
are as interested in this subject as we are, asking you to answer the following questions,
and also to give such other facts as in your judgment and from your experience are
pertinent: -
Airst--Do you use anthracite or bituminous coal? -
Second—If bituminous, how long have you used it instead of anthracite?
Third—Why did you change? - t
Fourth—In your section what is the relative difference of consumption for steam pur-
poses between anthracite and bituminous coals?
Fifth–In your judgment what is the comparative value as to anthracite and bitumin-
ous coals for steam generating purposes, with each coal at the same price per ton?
An early answer will oblige, - - -
Very respºctfully yours, - -
J. H. FISHER, SECRETARY.
This was sent to over 500 manufacturing concerns in the six
New England States, representing all sorts and kinds of manufac-
turers with a capital of from $20,000 up. Answers have been
received from 60, divided, geographically, as follows: . . .
REPORT ON TRANSPORTATION. - 5
Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I
New Hampshire . . . . . . . . . . . e º e s e e s e a s a e s a e s e e s e e s e ºs e e s e e s e e s s e º 'º e s = e º e º 'º e º 'º 2
Vermont . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I ,
Massachusetts, (of which 8 were from Boston) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Connecticut . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2O
Rhode Island. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
\ Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6O
Answers to the questions asked were as follows:
To No. 1.--Do you use anthracite or bituminous coal? 26 use -
bituminous; I 3 use anthracite; I I use both anthracite and bitum-
inous; 6 use water; 4 use neither anthracite nor bituminous.
To No. 2–If bituminous, how long have you used it instead of
anthracite? 3 I have used bituminous several years; 19 have
used anthracite several years; IO use neither.
To No. 3.—Why did you change? 26 answers were received.
24 changed because bituminous was more economical; 2 changed
because anthracite was more economical. -
To No. 4.—In your section what is the relative difference of
consumption for steam purposes between anthracite and bitum-
inous coals? 33 answers were received. 26 said bituminous was
most largely used ; 4 said anthracite was most largely used.
These were mostly in the Northwestern part of New England,
where bituminous could not compete with anthracite. 3 thought
the consumption neary equal. t
To No. 5–In your judgment what is the comparative value as
to anthracite and bituminous coal for steam generating purposes,
with each coal at the same price per ton P 37 answers were re-
ceived. I8 preferred anthracite; I 5 bituminous; 4 thought they
were about equal. This tabulation, however, does not give the
spirit of the letters which are, some of them, quite interesting.
It would be too long to quote all of them, but extracts from a few
representative ones are here given to show how bituminous is
driving anthracite coal from this market.
EXTRACTS.
A large safe manufacturer in Boston says: “Have used bitum-
inous coal for twenty years. In this section 90 per cent. of coal
used for steam purposes is bituminous. If we could get your
buckwheat, believe it would become very popular.”
A manufacturer from Fall River says: “Generally speaking
6 REPORT ON TRANSPORTATION.
anthracite preferred on account of its cleanliness even if nothing
saved.” T.,
A large manufacturing firm in Fitchburg, Mass., using bitum-
inous coal says: “Bituminous coal used here almost entirely for
manufacturing purposes; should estimate difference in favor of
anthracite at from 8 to IO per cent.” -
A well known cutlery firm at Shelburne Falls, Mass., writes:
“In this section bituminous is principally used for steam. At
same price per ton anthracite is cheapest by I 5 per cent.” .
The agent of a company at Chicopee Falls, Mass., says: “Bitum-
inous coal needs more attention than anthracite and is conse-
quently more expensive to handle.” He believes that any where
near the same price, anthracite would be much the cheapest fuel
for steam. -
The treasurer of a well known manufacturing company in
Adams, Mass., says: “I believe that bituminous is more economical
by IO per cent. than anthracite. I much prefer the latter on * .
account of cleanliness, and at same price think I should use it.”
The president of a manufacturing company in New Haven,
Conn., says: “So far as observation goes we should say the use of
bituminous coal for steam purposes is increasing very fast, as we
have observed that a good many manufacturers use it under their
boilers.” * ,
The treasurer of a large Electro Plating Company in Meridan,
Conn., says: “We use bituminous on account of economy, but
much prefer anthracite on the score of cleanliness, we would use it
at same price per ton, and think most manufacturers in this vicinity
would also.” -
A manufacturer in Exeter, N. H., says: “We should prefer
anthracite at 20 per cent. advance in price.”
A large manufacturing concern in Providence, R. I., running
since 1857, changed to bituminous eight years ago on the score
of economy, but thinks that “at the same price preference would
be in favor of anthracite.” .
Another manufacturer in Providence, R. I. says: “We experi-
mented with a mixture of pea and bituminous, but the cost of pea
soon became so near to the bituminous that there was no advan-
tage in using it.” r - .
So we might quote dozens of others, but a summing up of the
REPORT ON TRANSPORTATION. 7
letters show that while the manufacturing industries of New Eng-
land are yearly using more coal, in place of the water power,
either exhausted or grown too small for their increased business,
this increase is being absorbed by the bituminous trade and the
anthracite is not even holding its own.
But, to make this matter still more clear, the following card was
sent to IOO representative coal dealers in the New England States:
SCRANTON BOARD OF TRADE,
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY, -
1889.
- SCRANTON, PA.,
A/y Dear Sir : —The Transportation Committee of the Scranton Board of Trade de-
sires to make a report upon the coal trade of New England, and I therefore apply to
you for some information not otherwise obtainable.
In your section, what amounts of anthracite and bituminous coals were used for steam
purposes ten years ago, five years ago and last year? If you cannot give figures and are
willing to give the total amounts of your sales of bituminous and the steam producing
anthracite sizes for, say 1878, 1883, 1888, we would hold the information so acquired as
confidential, and publish only the general results arrived at.
We shall be glad to mail you a copy of the report when printed. Desiring an early
reply, I am Very respectfully yours,
- J. H. FISHER, SECRETARY.
To this 9 answers have been received, one each from Maine,
New Hampshire and Massachusetts, and two from Connecticut,
Rhode Island and Vermont.
A dealer in one of the largest manufacturing centers of New
Hampshire says: “Ten years ago coal used here was wholly an-
thracite, say about 2,OOO tons for steam. Now there is about
4,OOO tons soft coal for that purpose.” The answers from Ver-
mont were not very clear, but seemed to indicate that anthracite
coal was almost entirely used in one of the largest commercial
districts. l -
A dealer in central Massachusetts says: “In 1883 we sold 150
tons of bituminous, 50 tons of anthracite; in 1888, 5OO tons of
bituminous, IOO tons of anthracite.” In other words, while the
increase in anthracite had been IOO per cent., that of bituminous
had been 200 per cent., a ratio which seems to run through all
New England.
A dealer in one of the large cities of Connecticut writes: “In
answer to yours of 29th inst., we would say that in 1878 most all
steam producing, except the railroads, was done with anthracite
coal. In 1883 from 40 to 60 per cent. with anthracite coal; in
1888 from 5 to 10 per cent, with anthracite. All large steam pro-
ducers in this locality use bituminous coal.”
A dealer in Eastern Connecticut writes: “We can only say in
8 REPORT ON TRANSPORTATION.
a general way that bituminous coal is rapidly displacing anthra-
cite, locally, for steam purposes, but the aggregate consumption
of both has largely increased during the period stated.”
A dealer in Rhode Island says: “In absence of official record
I quote approximate quantity of coal used for steam in this vic-
inity. In 1878 it was nearly all anthracite and about 50,000 tons.
In 1888 it was fully V6 bituminous and about 90,000 tons.”
One of the largest dealers in Providence, R. I., writes: “ In
I878 we shipped and sold IO,500 tons of bituminous, I I,4OO pea
and smaller anthracite; 1885 we shipped and sold 22,500 tons of
bituminous, I8,3OO pea and smaller anthracite; I 888 we shipped
and sold 58,000 tons of bituminous, I 5,700 pea and smaller an-
thracite.”
These extracts coming as they do from all over New England,
tell their own story. Everywhere it is the same. All the records
confirm the remarkable growth of the bituminous coal trade, and
the corresponding decrease in the anthracite for steam purposes.
The peculiar relations existing in the coal trade make it inex-
pedient to quote these answers as fully as we should like to do, but
they all show a steady increase in the use of coal for steam power -
purposes, and that this increase is largely absorbed by bituminous
coal. In no portion of New England have we been able to find
the increase less than IOO per cent., sometimes running as high
as 500 per cent. during the last ten years.
You have seen that a large number of manufacturers, who are
using bituminous, have changed from anthracite because of the
cheapness of the former. “More economical,” is the answer of
24 out of 26 received. It is well worth while to examine into the
reason why it is more economical for them to use this coal because -
that shows how Scranton is being unjustly though perhaps unin-
tentionally, discriminated against, and from these facts thus gained
we may be able to suggest a remedy. i
The reason for the great increase in the use of bituminous coal
as a steam producer in the Eastern Middle and New England
States, shown to have taken place above, is to be accounted for
only upon the great difference in transportation rates, which exists
at the present time. It is a fact, susceptible of proof, that whereas
rates on all classes of staple heavy freights have steadily declined
\ ! .
REPORT ON TRANSPORTATION. 9
during the past ten years, the rates on anthracite coal to the sea-
board have steadily advanced during the same time, until bitum-
inous coal, which is not handled as cheaply as anthracite, and
which takes more room in a car, is hauled a longer distance, and
delivered free on board for less than the rate per mile charged
anthracite coal. -
It is not an easy matter to give figures to sustain these state-
ments, because ten years ago there were very few, if any, indi-
vidual coal operators who were independent of the railroad com-
panies in the Lackawanna-Wyoming valley. The entire coal
traffic of the valley was controlled by some three or four railroad
and coal mining companies. There was no necessity for giving
public information as to rates on coal, which was treated as a part
of the private business of the company. In the report of the Sec-
retary of Internal affairs for 1878, however, the rate, as given by
the D. L. & W. R. R. Co. was 92-100 cents per ton of 2000
lbs. per mile, the Lehigh and Susquehanna 99- IOO, and the D. &
H. C. Co. I } cents per ton of 2,240 lbs. per mile. This latter
company states, however, that it carried no through coal, except
company coal, and the rate was simply for its own convenience,
being what one department charged the other. It would be fair
then to assume the rate of the D. L. & W. as being, at that time,
an average one. That would be for a ton of coal, 92-100 cents
per mile, while at the same time, the average rate for freight was
I and 95-IOO cents per ton per mile. This would make the rate
on a ton of anthracite coal, from Scranton to tide water, in I 878,
over the D. L. & W. R. R., $1.33, it is now $1.8o, with no dis-
crimination for any sizes of coal, an advance, in eight years, of 47
cents a ton. The rates of the other companies are substantially
the same, though some of them make a difference in rates on the
smaller sizes. At the same time (1878) the Pennsylvania road
charged 7 and 3-10 cents per ton per mile on all through freight,
including coal. In 1888 the same company charged 64-IOo
cents per ton per mile on bituminous coal. In 1887, the D. L. &
W. rate on through freight had fallen to 86-IOO of a cent per ton
per mile, and that on coal advanced to I.O5 cents per ton per
mile. It is now (1889) 1.23 cents per ton per mile. With the
keen competition going on in commercial affairs during the last
ten years manufacturers have had to take advantage of every
IO REPORT ON TRANSPORTATION.
reduction possible in the cost of production, and when they found
that bituminous coal could be procured at a much less cost than
anthracite, they remodeled their grates and used the cheaper fuel.
It is, therefore, on the score of economy that most of them are
to-day using bituminous coal, and could the finer grades of
anthracite be delivered to them as cheaply as bituminous, and the
proper method of burning it be fully explained to them, it seems
as though the trade in anthracite small sizes must largely increase,
and much of what is now going to waste could be sold at a hand-
some profit to the consumer, the transporter and the producer.
Your committee would state here that we recognize fully the
debt Scranton owes to the progressive push and spirit of its rail-
roads and their managers, and that what has been said above and
what follows, is not said in any spirit of hostility to the railroad
companies, but is stated simply to show the actual state of affairs
with a view to applying, if possible, a remedy that shall be satis-
factory to all concerned.
III.-WHAT IS THE REMEDY, OR HOW CAN WE REGAIN OUR LOST
GROUND.
Since the narrowing of the guage of the Erie railroad and the
consequent bringing of grain box cars into the valley for return
freights of coal, the trade in anthracite has been steadily nnder-
going a change, in the direction of an increase in the smaller sizes
used. t
How great this increase has been may be seen from the reports
of the different companies, which show that sizes of stove and
smaller have increased about 14 per cent. Of the entire produc-
tion in eight years, while, of course, the trade in the larger sizes
has correspondingly decreased. One writer gives the result at a
colliery near Shamokin, as follows:
I879, prepared and nut, 87,930 tons.
I888, prepared and nut, 84,928 tons.
I879, pea and buckwheat, I 8,445 tons.
I888, pea and buckwheat, 39,088 tons.
While the prepared and nut sizes had declined somewhat, the
increase in pea and buckwheat had been over 100 per cent.
Operators generally are aware that this change has been taking .
REPORT ON TRANSPORTATION. - I I
place at all the collieries. The demand for finer sizes of coal has
led to the rebreaking of the larger sizes, and now pony rolls, as
they are called, used for this purpose, are the adjuncts of every
well equipped colliery. The rebreaking of this coal largely in-
creases the production of pea, buckwheat and culm. Of 100 tons
of coal rebroken, the proportions were above pea 67.9 tons, pea,
buckwheat and culm, 32. I tons. Of IOO tons lump, rebroken, the
result was, stove and nut 64 tons, pea, buckwheat and culm 36
tons. This would give an average of 94 the anthracite coal pro-
duction in pea, buckwheat and culm. In the total output of each
year only the coal actually sent to market is given, no account
whatever is taken of the smaller sizes dumped upon the culm pile,
so that it is not easy to estimate the entire product of the small
sizes. Many operators do not make any effort to save the buck-
wheat, owing to the difficulty of obtaining a market for it, and
throw it directly upon the waste pile. It is evident to any one
traveling through the anthracite regions that the waste is enor-
mous and greatly beyond the power of home consumption for
many years to come. Here then, is an anomalus state of affairs.
Millions of tons of fuel thrown away every year, for want of cheap
transportation, while soft coal is carried past our doors to drive
us out of the markets of New England and the Eastern Middle
States by reason of low rates. While, at the same time, the very
railroad companies that charge more to carry coal to tide-water
i than any other kind of freight, haul the same coal to the West for
less rates than they do other freight. The consequence has been
that while the percentage of coal sent to the Eastern Middle and
New England States has steadily declined, the percentage of coal
sent to the Western States has steadily increased. In 1882 they
took 2,213, IOZ tons, or 7.60 per cent. In 1888 this had risen to
5 ,039,568 tons, or 13.2 I per cent. In other words, the trade had
nearly doubled its percentage of the whole, in six years.
* Two reasons influence the railroad Companies against making a
change in the East-bound rates. One is that they are afraid that
by so doing all manufacturers would use small coals and thereby
reduce their profits on the large sizes; the other is that they are
afraid operators having secured low rates on small sizes may use
this as a handle to secure low rates on the larger sizes. But to
these two objections it may be urged: First—that they are very
I 2 - - REPORT ON TRANSPORTATION. -
rapidly losing the trade of the Eastern Middle and New England
States now, and that bituminous coal will eventually drive them
out of the markets they now enjoy, so that the only way to hold
the trade they already have is to follow the tendency of railroad-
ing in other freights in the direction of lower rates. As to the
individual operators they are interested jointly with the railroad
companies in keeping up the price of coal where there is no com-
petition, and all they ask is that the smaller kinds of anthra-
cite coal be carried to tide-water as cheaply as the competing
bituminous. .' :
The opening of the new bridge over the Hudson at Poughkeep-
sie makes this a most opportune time to discuss this question. It
is 142 miles from Scranton ; a rate of 4 mills a ton a mile on
buckwheat and culm would admit of their being sold in Boston
with profit to the producer and the carrier, while they would prove
successful competitors to bituminous coal. Bituminous coal is
carried at a profit for less than 4 mills a ton a mile, being car-
ried as cheaply as 3-5 mills, which would mean about 54 cents
from here to tide-water. The present rate on anthracite is about
I }4 cents, or nearly three times as much. Should the railroad
companies lose at first, in their lower rates, they would gain
largely in the end by the increased consumption of coal. The
tendency of the times is to lower rates on freight. All freight
rates have declined within the past few years except those on an-
thracite coal to the seaboard. The bituminous coals, more costly
to transport, but favored by low freight rates, are gaining largely
every year in the manufacturing centers of the East. Every year,
as the letters received from manufacturers themselves show,
new concerns are throwing out anthracite and using bituminous.
Were the coal roads of the Lackawanna Valley only carriers, in-
stead of miners, it would not take six months to decide the ques-
tion. It remains for this and other bodies through the coal regions
to show the coal companies that unless they will consent to lower
rates on the finer sizes of coal, they must be prepared to see the
soft coal men seize the rich prize of the manufacturers of the East,
with sales of millions of tons of coal a year, and wrest it from their
grasp. Your committee believe that such a movement should be
in the nature of a united one, and to that end would respectfully
recommend to the Board the calling of a conference of representa-
REPORT ON TRANSPORTATION. I3
tives from the leading cities of the anthracite coal fields and indi-
vidual collieries, to be held in Scranton, to take into considera-
tion the best means of obtaining from the railroad companies these
reduced rates on the smaller sizes of coal.
All of which is respectfully submitted,
- J. A. LANSING,
T. H. DALE,
I. F. MEGARGLE, l
Committee.
* REPORT ON CULM.
To the President and Members of the Scrantom Board of Trade :
GENTLEMEN:—An article on the generating of steam in Bab-
cock & Wilcox's useful catalogue for the current year, commences
with these words: . *
“Economy in the use of coal is a matter of great and growing
importance.” The annual product is fairly put at 420,000,000
tons. We will not be much out of the way if we put the amount
used for steam purposes at 50 per cent. of the whole, or 2 Io,000,-
OOO tons. Last year the total of the United States was 130,-
OOO,OOO tons. At an average cost of $2 a ton, (certainly a very
low estimate), our consumption of coal last year cost $260,000,000.
It will thus be seen how even a small per cent. of saving would
add to the wealth of the world.
It is estimated that of the steam power now in use in the world,
80 per cent. has been added in the last 25 years. When the
enormous amount of steam power used in this valley is considered,
the importance of a cheap fuel to produce that power is a ques-
tion of interest to all concerned in the production of steam.
While manufacturers and engineers have given much care to the
improvement of the steam engine, whereby they might reduce the
consumption of steam for a given amount of power, but little
attention, comparatively, has been given to secure economy in its
generation. -
To generate steam, two steps are necessary: Frst, procure the
heat; and Second, apply it to the water. The first step in gener-
ating steam is in burning the fuel to the best advantage. A pound
of coal, or any other fuel, has a definite heat producing capacity,
and is capable of evaporating a definite quantity of water, under
given conditions. This is the limit, beyond which perfection Call-
not go. Having determined these conditions, the next step is to
ascertain the cost of producing them. If two fuels evaporated
exactly the same amount of water or contained the same number
of heat units, and it cost less than half to produce steam by one
I6 REPORT ON CULM.
than the other, manifestly the manufacturer who used the cheaper
fuel would have an advantage over a rival who used the more
expensive fuel.
The statement that Scranton possesses the best and cheapest
steam power fuel in the world has not received the attention due
to its importance. Those not acqainted with the coal regions
have received it with incredulity. Many men in Scranton 3.1°C
doubtful as to its truth, because the facts have never been ex-
plained to them. It is not remarkable that this is so. By sheer
dint of extensive advertising, the world has been taught to believe
that natural gas was the cheapest, and best steam power fuel in
the world, while all the time millions and millions of tons of
actually the cheapest, safest and best steam power fuel in the
world were being thrown away upon our culm piles as a nuisance.
This being the case, your committee has felt that the time has
come when a carefully prepared statement of the facts as they
really are should be given to the world to the end that manufac-
turers searching for a cheap, reliable power fuel may know where
to find it.
The keen competition among manufacturers during the past
few years has made this question of cheap fuel a most important
one, and not only does Scranton possess the cheapest fuel now,
but the probabilities are that it will possess the cheapest for many
years to come. -
There are three ways of judging the relative merits of fuels.
First—By the comparative value of the constituent particles of
which they are composed, as shown by chemical analysis.
Second—By a comparison of the evaporative power of each
with water at 2 I 2 F. ->
Third—By a comparison of the actual results obtained in prac-
tice of the cost of horse-power per boiler per day.
The first test has always been a favorite one with chemists and
scientific men from its theoretical value. But the analysis of coals
from mines lying near each other, or from different parts of the
same mine vary so widely that it is a very difficult matter to de-
termine the practical value of fuels from this test alone. The
only way by which the value of bitumninous or anthracite can be
found by this method, is by taking averages of a number of differ-
ent tests and obtaining in this way an average coal. .
REPORT ON CULM. - 17
Taking the very able report of Mr. S. A. Ford, chemist of the
Edgar Thompson Steel Works, on the comparative values of
fuels quoted by Mr. Carnegie in a paper read before the Iron and
Steel Institute of London, and published in the Scientific American,
we find that one pound of carbon equals 3,668,391 heat units.
Using this as a standard, we obtain the following differences, from
the chemical analysis of the fuels.
. . . I,OOO feet of natural gas equals 2 IO,O69,604 heat units.
To produce the same number of heat units would require 62.97
pounds of coke, containing 90 per cent. carbon.
58.4 pounds anthracite coal.
57.25 pounds of carbon.
54.4 pounds of bituminous coal.
I,OOO feet of natural gas weighs 38 pounds.
I ton, of 2240 lbs., of bituminous coal equals 40,768 cubic feet of
gas. º & --
1 ton, of 2,240 lbs., of anthracite coal equals 38,080 cubic feet
of gas.
If all anthracite or bituminous coal was of the same chemical
composition, and if natural gas was the same wherever found, these
figures might be taken as conclusive and the question considered
settled, but as a matter of fact, the chemical analysis of the Sec-
ond Geological Survey shows such marked differences in the
quantity of carbon contained in coals of the same character
from different mines, and in gas from different wells, that a test of
this character becomes of value purely in a theoretical way and
is of very little help to the manufacturer anxious to reduce the
cost of generating his steam.
THE SECOND TEST.
The next test is by the amount of water a pound of fuel will
evaporate with water at 2 I2 deg. F. at atmospheric pressure.
This has long been considered one of the best and surest ways of
determining the value of fuels and has been in constant use for
many years. In 1842 Walter R. Johnson conducted a series of
experiments for the Navy Department of the United States Gov-
ernment, to determine the relative value of a number of different
kinds of fuels, and the tables then published have been widely
quoted from that time to the present, in scientific works on engi-
I 8 - REPORT ON CULM.
/
neering. In 1882 Quartermaster General Meigs, of the United
States Army, published the results of a series of experiments con-
ducted by L. M. Zuncker, a mechanical engineer from the Poly-
technic School, of Carlruhe, Germany, to redetermine the value of
fuels for the army. The tables thus obtained gave lower results
than those of Johnson, but apparently not being satisfied with this,
a co-efficient was used to bring the results to Johnson's standard.
Both these tables were reviewed by Wm. Kent, M. E., in a paper
read before the American Institute of Mechanical Engineers, at
the meeting of that body at Cleveland. The tables given in this
last article show the relative average values of bituminous coal,
with anthracite at IOO, as follows:
Somerset County, Pa., bituminous, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IOI. I
Cumberland, Md., bituminous, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97. I
Cambria County, Pa., semi-bituminous, . . . . . . . . . - 9 I.2
Pittsburgh, Pa., bituminous, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88.1
Ohio, bituminous, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75.O
In the annual report of the Second Geological Survey of Penn-
sylvania for 1886, Part II, an average of eight gas fields gives the
evaporative power of one cubic foot of gas at I. 15 lbs. of water.
I lb. anthracite (average of 8 tests of Johnson) evaporates 9.4
lbs. of water. - :
I lb, free burning bituminous (average of 8 tests) evaporates
9.6 lbs. of water. - -
I lb. coking bituminous (average of 8 tests) evaporates 9.5
lbs. of water. - • 4
By tests made by Prof. Breckenridge of Lehigh University:
I lb. buckwheat No. I evaporates 7.8 lbs of water.
I lb. buckwheat No. 2 evaporates 7.7 lbs. of water.
By tests made by Eckley B. Coxe, Bros. & Company:
I lb. pea coal evaporates 7.O lbs. of water.
I lb. buckwheat No. 1, dry, evaporates 7. I lbs. of water.
I lb. buckwheat No. 1, wet, evaporates 6.7 lbs. of water.
I lb. buckwheat No. 2, wet, evaporates 5.7 lbs. of water. ,
A test by Prof. Breckenridge of washed culm, under peculiarly
favorable circumstances, gave :
1 lb. washed culm evaporates 8.5 lbs. of water. 4 . . .
This result could not be attained in ordinary practice. It is,
however, quite safe to put the evaporative power of washed culm
REPORT ON TRANSPORTATION. I9
*
at 95 per cent. and of Ordinary mixed culm at 90 per cent. Of
buckwheat. . . -
But while this is true of the Lehigh coals, with which their tests
were made, it is very strongly asserted by individual operators in
the Lackawanna region that they obtain results from their tests
much nearer those obtained from prepared sizes, and they regard
culm, where used upon a large scale, as very little, if any, inferior
to the prepared sizes. These tests, however, we have been unable
as yet to obtain for publication. - '-->
While the theoretical value of gas is 38,000 cubic feet to a ton
of anthracite, it will be much safer, according to Mr. Ford and
Mr. Joseph D. Weeks, of the American Manufacturer, both very
high authorities on the subject, to assume 30,000 cubic feet of
gas as the practical equivalent of a ton of 2,240 lbs. of coal.
Taking this as a standard, then the evaporative power of fuels
reduced to tons of 2,240 lbs., is as follows: -
3O,OOO cubic feet of gas (2,240 lbs.) will evaporate 34,500 lbs.
of water.
Free burning bituminous, I ton (2,240 lbs.) will evaporate 21,-
459 lbs. of water. -
Coking bituminous, I ton (2,240 lbs.) will evaporate 2 I,224
lbs. of water.
Anthracite, prepared sizes, I ton (2,240 lbs.) will evaporate
2 I, I43 lbs. Of water.
Anthracite, pea, I ton (2,240 lbs.) will evaporate 15,680 lbs. of
water.
g Buckwheat, I ton, (2,240 lbs.) will evaporate I 5,724 lbs. of
water. -
Washed culm, I ton (2,240 lbs.) will evaporate 14,915 lbs. of
Water. t
Mixed culm, I ton (2,240 lbs.) will evaporate 14, 130 lbs. of
Water. i -
Or, if we transpose these figures slightly we find that to evap-
orate, say 3O,OOO lbs. of water, it will take— ---
Gas, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26,038 cubic feet
Free burning bituminous, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,131 pounds
Coking bituminous, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3, 166 pounds
Anthracite, prepared sizes, . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3, 178 pounds
Pea, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,300 pounds
2 O : REPORT ON CULM.
Buckwheat, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,273 pounds -
Culm, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,762 pounds
To get at the real value of these figures, compare the cost of
each fuel to do the same amount of work.
26,086 cubic feet of gas at 10 cents per 1,000 feet, $2.60.
3,131 lbs. of bituminous coal at $1.50 per ton, ... $2. Io
3, 166 lbs. of coking bituminous at $1.50 per ton, . 2, 12
3, 178 lbs. of anthracite at $2.50 per ton, ... . . . . . . 3.5C
4,300 lbs. of pea at $1.00 per ton,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . I.94
4,273 lbs. of buckwheat at 75 cents per ton, . . . . . . I.44
'4,762 lbs of Culm at ten cents per ton, . . . . . . . . . . 22
If to these figures be added the cost of handling the coal and
ashes, we shall have the entire cost.
I. Anthracite, prepared sizes, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $4.75
2. Coking bituminous, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.37
3. Free burning bituminous, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.35
4. Pea, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.23
5. Buckwheat, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.73
6. Gas, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.61
7. Culm, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I. 5 I
If it be objected, to this statement, that the price of gas is too
high, it can be met by the counter statement that it is selling for
that to-day, but that it must be much higher in the near future,
for the best observers now unite in the prediction that the flow
of natural gas is on the wane and everything tends to confirm
Prof. Leslie's opinion, given after long and careful investigation,
that the supply of natural gas is limited and must soon be ex-
hausted.
It is a mistake to suppose that natural gas is, or ever can be,
a cheap fuel. It must advance in price until it becomes more
expensive to use than coal. At first the waste was enormous,
everyone seemed to think the supply was inexhaustible, but it.
began to be noticed, by and by, that the pressure steadily dimin-
ished from the day the well was first opened, so that drills must
be kept constantly at work opening up new territory to replace.
the old when that was used up. No fuel so supplied can be cheap.
Already the necessity for meters is felt, to regulate the supply,
and with meters will come increased charges in the use of the fuel.
In addition to its expense constantly increasing, and its liabiltiy.
REPORT ON CULM. 2 I
to give out at almost any time, is its tendency to blow up, a lesson
that has been grimly taught in the number of deaths and destruc-
tion of valuable property that have occurred since its use became
general. & -
THE THIRD TEST.
From the contemplation of this uncertain and dangerous fuel,
turn now to the coal waste of the anthracite region. Here
beside each breaker rise constantly increasing mountains of culm,
the fine particles of coal too small to be merchantable, but long
recognized as containing the very best of the coal.
It does not now appear profitable to transport it, and it will not
be, unless rates of transportation can be secured very much lower
than now exist; but, used alongside of the piles, it yields aston-
ishing results. It is not expensive to use. Any grate that will
admit of a steam draft will answer, and these can be placed under any
boiler at small cost. In the anthracite regions two makes of grates are
most largely used, the Howe and the McClave, named after their
respective inventors. A company in Scranton uses boilers of 365
horse power and consumes 7 tons of culm a day at IO cents a ton roy-
alty. The plant is erected on the side of a culm pile and the material
shoveled directly into the fire. To handle this culm and wheel
away the ashes, requires the services of two firemen at $50. and
$45. a month respectively, and one ash-man at $35 a month.
This gives I. 56 cents per horse power per boiler per day. To do
the same work with natural gas, with 30,000 cubic feet to the ton,
as given by such high authorities as Leslie, Ashburner, Ford and
others, at 10 cents a thousand feet, which is about the lowest price
for which gas is now sold, it would cost 534 cents per horse
power per boiler per day. With bituminous coal at $1.50 per
ton, it would cost handling included, 4 cents per horse power per
boiler per day. Anthracite at $2.50 per ton, would cost almost
6 cents. Pea, at $1.OO per ton, would cost 3. I cents. Buckwheat
at 75 cents per ton would cost 2.62 cents. Allowing for the difference
in amounts used to produce the same steam, would make some
difference in the amount per horse power, but would not much effect
the general result. Taken generally it may be safely stated that
fuel per horse power per boiler, costs per day, as follows:
Anthracite coal, prepared sizes, from 5 to 8 cents.
22 REPORT ON CULM.
z
Bituminous coal from 4 to 6 cents. -
Natural gas, from 3 to 5 cents.
Culm, from 4 to 2 cents. *
Another Scranton concern, however, is doing even better than
the above. Owning its own culm pile, it simply runs the coal
into the fires by automatic slides, and its fuel costs only the price
of handling, or one-half of one cent per horse power per boiler
per day. If there is, anywhere in the wide world, a cheaper
steam-producing fuel than this, your committee does not know of
it. And this fuel will not give out nor explode. The manufac-
turer who purchases it has the pile in sight when purchasing.
If he leases, he has the assurance that for every ton of coal sent
to market a certain proportion must go into culm. We are annu-
ally throwing upon our culm piles an amount equal to the entire
Western trade in anthracite coal. He need, therefore, have no
fears that this fuel will give out. He will find here men who will
make contracts for fuel for from I O to 25 years, or he can, if he
prefers, buy up a culm pile for himself. The notion that the
culm must be used fresh, has been very effectually exploded by
companies here who have used it over fifteen years old with satis-
factory results. -
One of the practical proofs of the cheapness of this fuel over
natural gas is found in the fact that steel rails are made here in
Scranton to-day with culm for less than it costs to make the same
rails, in the same way, with natural gas, so that rails made here
can be carried 300 miles to Pittsburg to get an even start with
their natural gas made rails, and then beat them in the same
market. As a consequence, more steel rails were made in Scran-
ton, during the first six months of 1889, than in any other city in
the world, allowing Pittsburg and Chicago the rails credited to
them from outside mills. Manufacturers everywhere will do well.
to ponder these facts and to investigate them fully.
That, “Westward the star of Empire takes its way” is true of
manufacturing concerns as well as people, and the time is not far
distant when many of the manufactories of New England will
follow westward the footsteps of the young men who have gone.
before and we may yet see the Lackawanna-Wyoming Valley filled.
with Eastern industries, as over a century ago, it was peopled
with settlers from New England States.
REPORT ON CULM. - 23
In his address of welcome to the American Institute of Mechan-
ical Engineers, at their session in this city, October, 1888, Mr. W.
F. Mattes, the Chief Engineer of the Lackawanna Iron and Steel
Company, said that his company owned and mined its own coal,
using the large sizes to produce steam and selling the smaller
sizes made in producing the large coal, until it cost them 5 cents.
a ton to throw away the culm or waste. Then they had substi-
tuted the Howe grate under all their steam boilers and now used
the culm they formerly threw away, and sold their lump coal.
They not only saved in this way, but, as their fuel cost them prac-
tically nothing, they were enabled to make steel rails cheaper with
culm than with natural gas. His company uses some 7,OOO tons
of culm per month. -
When the Scranton Steel Company was organized, a few years
ago, all its boilers were provided with the McClave grate for burning
culm. This company now uses from I2 to 15 thousand tons of culm
per month. Although the shrinkage in the steel rail trade of 1888
was 750,000 tons as compared with that of 1887, or equal to the
entire steel rail product of 1879, yet the shrinkage in the Scranton
output was only 8,OOO tons, or only about a week's production of
the two mills, which turn out an average of a thousand tons of
steel rails for every working day of the year.
But the use of culm, like that of electricity, is only in its infancy.
Not only must manufacturers seek the cheap fuel, but the cheap
fuel will be transmitted into power and conveyed to the manufac-
turer.
The day is not far distant when electrical power will be trans-
mitted long distances for manufacturing purposes. When that
time comes it will quickly be seen that nowhere in the world can
power be generated more cheaply or more easily than in the Lacka-
awanna and Wyoming Valleys. In view of all these circum-
stances, then your committee feel that one of the greatest burdens
resting upon this Board is to scatter broadcast among manufac-
turing concerns the great advantages Scranton possesses over any
other city of the world in its cheap power fuel. -
Your committee would return its thanks to the honorable Sec-
retaries of War and the Navy, to the Superintendent of the United
States Geological Survey, to the editors of the Scientific American,
to Mr. Joseph D. Weeks of the American Manufacturer, to Messrs.
24. REPORT ON CULM.
Foster of the Colliery Engineer, Mr. F. E. Saward, of the Coal
Trade journal, to Messrs. Babcock and Wilcox and others for
assistance rendered and information furnished. -
All of which is respectfully submitted. -
J. A. LANSING, -
T. H. DALE, Committee.
I. F. MEGARGLE,