SECTION XV. STATISTICAL. THE fourteen preceding Sections in these pages have dealt exclusively with some of the theoretical and practical questions, which chiefly interest those who are actually engaged in the manufacture of iron. It is proposed in the remaining divisions to consider certain facts and figures more calculated to interest the trader and economist than the manufacturer, yet of sufficient importance to be included in a work of a more purely technical character. As stated, in the opening remarks of this volume, it was a desire expressed by certain friends to receive some report on the manufacture of iron in foreign countries which led to its compilation. It was considered by them that the discharge of my official duties at the International Exhibitions of Paris and Philadelphia would have placed ample materials at my command for the preparation of such a report as that referred to. It is however open to question whether such displays as those just mentioned afford the true means of arriving at very correct conclusions respecting the condition of this branch of industry in the different exhibiting nations. The necessary information for such a result can only be obtained by a more minute examination than that afforded by a mere inspection of samples of workmanship exposed to view upon such occasions. Although the work when specially prepared for the purpose may not represent an average make of the exhibitor, the collection of specimens as were to be found at Paris and Philadelphia are most useful to those who are desirous of studying the position of a manufacture like that of iron. Articles of the metal as well as of steel were shown in both cities in which mere magnitude proved the possession of the mechanical means of dealing with such masses as are only to be found in establishments of the highest importance and development. Various modes of testing the quality are adopted which, from the expense and labour attending them, are only practised when it is certain that the results will be carefully inspected by a numerous class of competent judges. Besides these modes of affording instruction to those interested in acquiring it, questions bearing on the purely scientific aspects of this branch of metallurgy were, on both occasions, largely illustrated by a well-chosen series of examples. So far as the word "international" is concerned, as applied to an exhibition of iron, in its various forms, the title is perhaps somewhat exaggerated. When prominence in manufacturing skill has to be manifested by the display of an armour-plate of 40 tons, or a cast-steel ingot of 100 tons, as was done at Paris, firms at a distance naturally shrink from encountering the expense of sending such ponderous masses far away from home. Under such circumstances the iron section, in point of extent and completeness, is chiefly an exhibition of the products of the country in which the gathering is held. In my Report to Her Majesty's Government on the International Exhibition at Philadelphia, I remarked on the poverty which was so conspicuous in the number and character of the specimens of iron sent from Great Britain, notwithstanding the fact of its being the largest producer of the metal in the world. In like manner, in an excellent report to the Government of the United States on the Paris Exhibition, my friend the Hon. Dan. J. Morrell laments the absence of American products from the vast buildings in the Champ de Mars. In one respect it must be admitted that the French stood out, if not foremost, certainly very conspicuously in the world as manufacturers of iron; viz., in the scientific completeness with which they presented the information intended for the use of visitors. This completeness was not limited to the mere objects of manufacture themselves, but embraced the locality, the natural conditions and the method of extraction of the raw materials, models and drawings of the machinery employed, as well as minute descriptions of the processes, and detailed accounts of the condition of the workmen engaged in conducting them. No doubt in these respects this nation was closely followed at Paris, by the ironmasters of Sweden and Belgium, and by the establishments of the Austrian Government; but on the whole I question whether anyone will dispute the place of honour, at all events on that occasion, with the French. Descriptions of what was to be seen in the way of iron metallurgy in Philadelphia in 1876, and in Paris in 1878, have been so amply supplied by my friends Messrs. Åkerman, Morrell, Tunner, and Wedding, that I do not propose to extend my labours by referring in detail to my own lengthened experience at either of these exhibitions, but rather to make that experience useful in the preparation of what follows in the succeeding Sections of this work. The progress which Great Britain has made in the means of economising the production of iron and steel has made itself apparent in the enormous increase of its annual make. One hundred and forty years ago, i.e., in 1740, the make of pig-iron in the United Kingdom, as we have seen, was under 20,000 tons-in 1880 it was 7 million tons. With the means at the disposal of the iron manufacturers in 1740 it would have been physically impossible to have achieved this result. To effect what has been done charcoal has had to give place to coal, a change first successfully accomplished by Abraham Darby; James Watt had to place the steam-engine at our disposal, Cort had to teach the puddling process, Neilson the use of hot air in the blast furnace, and Bessemer the pneumatic mode of making steel. These discoveries, the offspring of British invention, were rapidly adopted abroad; and if the United Kingdom is still far ahead in the quantity of iron produced, this has not prevented alarm being felt lest we are at length being overtaken in the race. As an instance, it was recently stated in the public prints, that Belgium was outstripping us in economy of manufacture, because Cleveland pig iron was being converted in Belgian works into wrought iron girders, and then returned to London and sold at a cheaper rate than the rolling mills in England could supply them. Now Cleveland pig iron, it is true, is imported into Belgium from Middlesbrough for foundry purposes; but the girders sent to England are made of an entirely different description of pig iron, smelted on the spot in Belgian furnaces. Nevertheless there is no doubt that in late years our foreign trade, relatively speaking, has been greatly encroached upon. This will best be seen by an examination of the figures contained in the subjoined table,1 which shows roughly the proportion of pig iron made in Great Britain and elsewhere, the figures representing thousands of tons: Percentage of whole made in Gt. Britain 1871. 1872. 1873. 1874. 1875. 1876. 1877. 1878. 1879. 1880. 1881. 1882. 6,627 6,741 6,566 5,991 6,365 6,555 6,608 6,300 6,009 7,721 8,377 8,493 5,399 7,165 7,604 7,060 6,776 6,374 6,822 7,255 7,759 9,764 10,589 11,582 12,026 13,906 14,170 13,051 13,141 12,929 13,430 13,555 13,768 17,485 18,966 20,075 441 551 481 461 46 481 50% 491 461 441 441 Do. in other countries 442 514 533 54 514 491 504 53 55 55% 554 573 ཙ།ཡྻ 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Thus it will be seen that twelve years ago (1871) we produced about (6,627,000-5,399,000) 1,228,000 tons more than all the rest of the world put together, and we end in 1882 by producing (11,582,000-8,493,000) 3,089,000 tons less than the joint produce of other nations. Approximately our exports of all kinds of iron have been as follows (in thousands of tons): 1871. 1872. 1873. 1874. 1875. 1876. 1877. 1878. 1879. 1880. 1881. 1882 1,061 1,331 1,142 774 947 910 881 924 1,223 1,632 1,482 1,758 2,635 2,563 2,268 2,141 1,888 1,642 1,831 1,715 2,075 2,693 2,922 3,240 3,696 3,894 3,410 2,915 2,835 2,552 2,712 2,639 3,298 4,325 4,404 4,906 2,931 2,847 3,156 3,076 3,530 4,003 3,896 3,661 2,711 3,196 4,173 3,495 6,627 6,741 6,566 5,991 6,365 6,555 6,608 6,300 6,009 7,521 8,577 8,493 1 Report of the British Iron Trade Association, 1882, page 138. Corrected, when necessary, approximately to tons of 2,240 lbs. avoirdupois. In the figures setting forth the quantities produced in "other countries" certain corrections have had to be made in the numbers given in the Report of the Iron Trade Association. It is not until 1881 that the production of the German Empire is given as a whole when there is a sudden increase of about one million tons in the column (p. 138) previously given as Prussia. On referring to Pechar's "Coal and Iron in all Countries of the World" I find that the quantities exceed those in the Report referred to, beginning with an excess of 194,000 tons in 1871 and ending with 477,000 tons in 1876. Pechar ends his account with 1876, so that between that year and the end of 1880 I am without any data. I have therefore divided equally the difference among the four years which intervene. In AustroHungary there is a blank for 1878 which is filled up with 400,000 tons. A similar omission for 1882 occurs for Sweden and Austro-Hungary together for which 1,000,000 tons have been inserted. 3 Obtained by adding 25 per cent. for waste to the weights exported as given in Report of Iron Trade Association. hand. These numbers disregard any alterations in the quantity of stocks of iron on The same statistical tables of the British iron trade, upon which the last series of calculations have been based, give the following as the exports of pig iron alone from different countries during the ten years ending 1880 (in thousands of tons): : 1871. 1872. 1873. 1874. 1875. 1876. 1877. 1878. 1879. 1880.1 From Great Britain as above 1,061 1,331 1,142 774 947 910 881 924 1,223 1,632 From other countries 217 257 305 355 455 389 451 469 517 512 Total 1,278 1,588 1,447 1,129 1,402 1,299 1,332 1,393 1,740 2,144 Considered as percentages, we have the following numbers: These tables clearly show that, although Great Britain in the transactions of the ten years has largely increased her exports of pig iron, yet foreign countries, chiefly Germany it may be observed, have sent abroad more than their former share of the additional quantities required by importing nations. Thus while the increase of Great Britain amounts to only about 56 per cent. on the exports of 1871, that of other countries is no less than 136 per cent. Of course due allowance must be made for the circumstance that the percentage addition, in the case of other nations, is on an initially small quantity; the actual increases being 571,000 tons for Great Britain against 295,000 tons collectively for other countries. Practically the increased production of iron, during the ten years under consideration, has arisen in four countries as follows (in thousands of tons): The last three years contain some blanks which have been filled up with assumed numbers. 2 The last three years are given partly by estimate owing to no returns being inserted for some of the countries. |