The foregoing article on "American locomotives," that being the headline used, is clipped from an Australian letter in the November 20 issue of Sell's Commercial Intelligence. It was eighteen or twenty months ago that the world heard of the big foreign sales of American locomotives, and there has since been a most persistent attempt to prove that these locomotives are inferior to those of foreign particularly of English-manufacture; and either our locomotives are inferior, as stated, or there has been a deliberate and unfair crusade against them. From a businesslike way of looking at the matter, it seems singular that American railroads can carry freight so much more cheaply than can railroads in other countries if our locomotives are deficient.

The agitation began when it was announced (and our manufacturers are perhaps too free in announcing such matters) that we had obtained several large orders in England. So great was the feeling here about the purchase that railway directors had to apologize to their shareholders for purchasing American-made articles, although these shareholders were interested in having articles bought at the lowest prices. Shortly afterwards, cablegrams were printed in London papers stating that even the railway authorities in Switzerland had found American locomotives unsatisfactory in fuel consumption, etc. I wrote at once to an American locomotive-manufacturing company, and in their reply-and they had every reason to be well informed—the managers said that, as far as they were aware, no American locomotives had ever been sent to Switzerland, and that no basis for a comparison existed in that country. So far as the British market was concerned, they said they had endeavored for two years to ascertain what satisfaction their engines were giving, but they had never been furnished with an official statement; unofficial reports, however, had all been of an extremely satisfactory character. They thought that "either the work in which the American locomotives had been employed was not comparable to the work of the British locomotives, or the conditions of the locomotives themselves were not to be compared, as the difference in fuel consumption could hardly be so great as stated." They added:

We were informed that during the recent coal famine in London, when the train loads were increased about 10 per cent, our locomotives were able to meet the increased demand upon them and showed an economy of coal consumption, notwithstanding the increase.

The materials employed for fire boxes and tubes are identical in the American and English locomotives. The American locomotives were provided with grate bars of the standard pattern of the railway for which they were intended, and the only difference which there could be in the consumption of steam, therefore, must result from a difference in the work done or the attention the locomotives received. American locomotives are designed to obtain the maximum efficiency possible for

their weight and heating surface, because from the American point of view the highest efficiency of the machine as a whole is the highest operating economy, even though there might be a slight difference of fuel consumption. By this we mean that, by making certain changes in the valves, it would be possible to reduce considerably the amount of steam used, and consequently the amount of fuel consumed, but this would be attended by a corresponding reduction of efficiency. An increase in efficiency carries with it an increase in earning power for the railway altogether out of proportion to the slight increase of fuel consumed. We are inclined to think that English locomotive officials and English builders seek to obtain the maximum economy in the machine itself, without respect to the larger considerations which govern the American practice. Were the valve motion of our. locomotives slightly altered, as we have indicated, we feel sure that the fuel consumption could be reduced so as to compare favorably.

This letter was written in 1901. The crusade against our locomotives continues, and our builders.disdain to protect themselves by publication. It seems to me that a British-made locomotive of the best type should be purchased and run as a test on some American railroad; and I hope an English engine driver, selected by the manufacturer of the engine, may be given charge of it, as a mere matter of fairness. MARSHAL HALSTEAD,

BIRMINGHAM, December 5, 1902,

Consul.

IRON AND STEEL TRADES IN SCOTLAND.

In a review of the pig-iron trade in 1902, a writer in the Scotsman says that American demand and American reports have dominated the pig-iron markets of the whole world, to the exclusion of all other influences, and that the iron market must now look to America for guidance, as she has proved her power of taking on her shoulders the burden of what threatened to be an almost universal European depression and converting it into a semblance of prosperity. He goes into details:

Russia, hitherto a pig-iron-importing country, exported to America this year over 32,000 tons of pig iron, Germany sent her immense quantities of pig iron and manufactured steel, even France contributed supplies, and Cleveland, west coast hematite, and Scottish pigs owe all their advances and their present stability entirely to America. When figures are published at the end of the year, it seems a safe guess to say America will have absorbed from Europe a total of considerably over 1,000,000 tons of pig iron, manufactured iron, and steel, and this in addition to the consumption of her own enormous production, which should reach over 18,000,000 tons this year. To Germany this unexpected demand must have proved an unmixed blessing, rescuing her from what was fast approaching a commercial crisis.

Admiration can not be withheld from the Americans for the sensible, calm way in which their purchases have been effected throughout the whole year. Purchases even mildly approximating to the present totals would in former years have sent the pig-iron markets wild with excitement, but this year it would appear almost as it America's total purchases were directed from one office desk, so judiciously have

her demands been regulated and spread over the various markets at her disposalbuying one week in Germany, the next week here, and always allowing a market to get repose whenever it appeared to get excited over her purchases.

America still continues to purchase fair quantities here and there, and it is quite certain that well into March next extensive shipments from European ports must take place on her account. But the question is ever being asked, At what period will this American demand cease? Only about two years ago America was flooding the Continent and Great Britain with her pig iron and manufactured steel, and the argument is permissible that the enormous increase in America's production which has taken place in response to her sudden burst of prosperity must sooner or later overtake her consumption and perhaps leave something to spare for export.

In regard to the steel trade, he says that this branch of industry has been fairly prosperous, but the prospects are not bright. One paragraph contains the gist of his report:

Trade in the northeast of England is in a most depressed condition. This has a reflex action here, and while manufacturers in Scotland are, as a rule, better employed and have their order books better filled, still, if there was a cessation of buying from Canada and America, it would aggravate matters considerably. The American demand has not yet ceased, but it is less than it was. A fall in prices would probably induce fresh work both in shipbuilding and other directions, though, unfortunately, in shipbuilding, on which the steel trade largely depends in this country, the prospects are not good, freights being so low that there is no inducement to shipowners to build new cargo steamers.

Of the state of the malleable-iron industry, this expert takes a somewhat gloomy view:

The year now closing has brought no relief to the malleable-iron trade in Scotland. It has been saddled with dear fuel, and the costs of raw material have been exceptionally high. This has been due chiefly to the boom in the steel trade in America, which had the effect of raising prices here. While thus the trade has had to contend with abnormally high costs, it has, on the other hand, had to face a very low demand for the finished article. In the last month or two some of the malleable-iron works have not been able to keep going more than half time, and in the case of at least one considerable establishment notice has been given to the workers of the contingency of complete stoppage. There can scarcely fail to be a reaction, and there are some who think that the begining of the year will see a change for the better.

The situation is perplexing, and he would be a bold man who would venture to forecast the future with any degree of assurance.

EDINBURGH, December 30, 1902.

RUFUS FLEMING,

Consul.

JOINT-STOCK COMPANIES IN SCOTLAND.

This year 256 limited-liability companies have been organized in Scotland with a total capital of £7,762,220 ($37,774,800), as against 202 companies in 1901 with a total capital of £5,512,142 ($26,924,800). Of the companies registered last year 60 per cent were private concerns-i. e., the shares were not offered to the public. In 1902

the percentage of private concerns is more than 70. The following comparative table sets forth the different industries in which company promoting has taken place during the past twelve months:

How greatly the registrations of companies and their gross capitals have fluctuated is apparent from the appended figures for the past five years:

MANCHESTER EXPORTS TO THE UNITED
STATES.

Consul W. F. Grinnell sends from Manchester, January 3, 1903, tables of the exports of cotton yarn and cotton velvets, cords, and fustians from that district to the United States for the years 1901 and 1902, as shown below:

Exports of cotton velvets, cords, and fustians to the United States during the years 1901

Exports of cotton yarn to the United States during the years 1901 and 1902.