Coal Trade: Minutes of evidence, 21 June 1830

Die Lunæ, 21 Junii 1830.

[235]

The Lord President in the Chair.

David Mushett Esquire is called in, and examined as follows:

Where do you reside?

At Coleford in Gloucestershire.

What is your Occupation there?

I am Proprietor of several Mines of Coal and Iron Ore, and have also been concerned in the Iron Trade in the Forest of Dean.

What Information can you give the Committee respecting the Coal Trade in that Part of the Severn?

There are sundry Tramroads which have been made through the Forest of Dean, with Consent of the Commissioners of Woods and Forests, which Tramroads terminate at Lydney, a Port on the River Severn. Those Tramroads are subject to an annual Rent to the Crown; we pay 365l. 10s. for Surface Rent to the Crown; they were made with the special Permission of the Crown.

To what Port is the Trade in general carried on from that Place?

The Trade from Lydney is confined by Necessity nearly to the Port of Gloucester.

Has that been always the Case?

It was not always the Case; upwards of Thirty Years ago the Coals of the Forest of Dean used to be sent to Bristol, to Chepstow and to Creeks within the Severn, without being subject to the Payment of the Coastwise Duty, on the Score of River Navigation.

When was that altered?

[236]

In about the Year 1796, I think; that was the Period of the Commencement of the Newport Canal and other public Works for the Purpose of conveying the Iron manufactured from the Furnaces recently erected in Monmouthshire; it appeared to those engaged in these Undertakings, that it would be a very good Thing for the general Prosperity of the Concern to have Newport exempted from the Coastwise Duty on Coal. There had been an Act passed (the Consolidated Act of 1787) which laid a Duty on all Coal indiscriminately carried from Port to Port. The Newport People claimed the Exemption from the Duty on Coal, on the Score of River Navigation. Shortly after, the Gentleman who superintended the Newport Concern sent One or Two Vessels into the Port of Gloucester, that being a separate Port, which were seized under the before-mentioned Act for the Nonpayment of the Duty. A very lengthened Correspondence took place in consequence, and an Application was made upon the Subject to the Treasury, who concurred in having a Clause framed by the Attorney and Solicitor General, then Lord Eldon and Lord Redesdale, to exempt the Newport Coal from Duty, upon the Grounds of River Navigation. This Clause was intended to be introduced into one of the Newport Acts of Parliament, but instead of introducing the Clause as framed by the Attorney and Solicitor General, which applied to River Navigation generally, it confined the Exemption from Duty to Coal carried upon the Newport Canal. This Clause, I believe, was never laid before the Committee, but it crept into the Act and became the Law of the Land, not as Lord Redesdale and Lord Eldon framed it, but exempting from Duty their own Coal carried on their own Canal. As the Clause was originally framed, the Coal Owners at Lydney and of the Forest of Dean would have continued to have sent their Coal into the Markets of the Severn on the same Terms as Newport.

In point of fact the Clause has had the Effect of driving the Lydney Coal out of the Markets of the Severn?

Yes; we are shut out of those Markets in consequence.

When were the Railroads you have referred to made, which now carry Coal to the Port of Lydney?

In 1809, 1810 and 1811.

Subsequent to the passing of the Act of 1796?

Yes; but the Coals of Dean Forest had been, from Time out of Mind, carried from little Pills or Creeks in small Vessels, and sold in different Places within the Severn.

The Export of Coals from the Forest of Dean has become of late Years more and more confined to the Port of Gloucester, has it not?

Yes, it has, almost entirely. I have a Paper shewing the comparative State of Trade in the Ports of Lydney and Newport, which are the only Two Ports, strictly speaking, within the ancient Boundaries of the River Severn. In the Year ending the 31st of March 1829 Newport exported into the Markets of the Severn 191,963 Tons of Coals. In the same Year Lydney sold, within the Port of Gloucester, 41,794 Tons; in the Port of Bristol, which we reckon one of the Markets of the Severn, 398 Tons; to the Westward, of which Trade we take a Share in common with Newport, 204 Tons; and in the Pill of Aust, 232 Tons; making altogether 42,628 Tons of Coals. That is the whole of the entire Sale of Lydney on a Capital of nearly 400,000l. expended between the various individual Investments and the Capital of the Lydney Railway Company.

What is the Quality of the Lydney Coal, as compared with the Newport?

It is inferior, not being at all bituminous; the Small of it can only be used for burning Lime and burning Bricks.

[237]

Are there not great Iron Founderies established there?

Yes; we have been driven to try the making of Iron, to find a Consumption for the Coal, but with very uncertain Success.

Have you any Stone Coal?

None.

That of which you complain is the particular Effect of the Coastwise Duties upon your Coal, in consequence of the Exemption in favour of Newport?

Yes.

Having spoken of the particular Effect of those Coastwise Duties as affecting the Sale of your Coal, can you say any thing as to their Effect upon the Coal Trade lower down the Bristol Channel originally?

[238]

Yes. I would beg to state, in the first place, the public Hardship which arises out of this Exemption in respect of the small Coal, for which the Consumer is obliged to pay 6s. a Ton at Newport, when Coal of an equal Quality, for the same Purpose, can be purchased at Lydney at 3s. or at 3s. 6d. per Ton. No Markets can be found in the Severn, owing to its being subject to the 4s. Duty. We are restricted to the Use of a Riddle not larger than Three Eighths of an Inch Opening, which amounts entirely to a Prohibition. I beg leave further to suggest, that the unequal Operation of this Duty is a very great Hardship on the Public, as it applies equally to all Sorts of Coal, without any reference to Quality. Most of the Lydney Coal I consider inferior by 2s. 6d. per Ton to the Newport Coal. We are, besides, subject to a Riddle of such a small Size, that we should have to grind the Coal, if we could even get a Demand for it; but there is little or no Demand for it, and it is now perishing in many Thousands of Tons every Year. We have applied to redress this Grievance from Time to Time; and, several Years ago, I took an introductory Letter from a most respectable Gentleman in Gloucestershire, at that Time a Cabinet Minister, The Right Honourable Charles Bragge Bathurst, (who gave me the best Assistance in his Power,) to the Collector of Bristol, stating to him the Object which I had in view, and which he was to consider as merely a preliminary Measure on which to ground an ulterior Proceeding. My Intention was to enter at the Custom House a Quantity of Lydney Small Coal at the lower Duty of 10d. a Chaldron, which, if refused to Entry, it was my Intention to present a Memorial to the Treasury, praying that this Coal, as at Neath and Swansea, should be admitted to Entry regularly at the Culm Duty. The Collector was well disposed to the Measure; but one of the inferior Officers told the Collector, that if he did so, he would be acting contrary to his Duty. The Reason assigned was, that the Lydney Coal was a bituminous Coal; I resisted this Inference, knowing it was not so. The only Proof this Officer gave of its being bituminous Coal was, that it gave out Flame in burning, which he considered the only decided Proof of a bituminous Quality; though he admitted that Straw, Hay, Paper, Timber and other Articles burnt with Flame, and could not be considered bituminous. This Officer recommended seizing the Vessel unless I should agree to enter the Coal at the high Duty, which I refused. I would not submit to enter it at the 4s. Duty, and I begged to have the Coal thrown overboard; this was refused; and after a good deal of Discussion, during which I repeatedly referred them to the Nature of the Proceedings, it was at last agreed to seize the Coal in Payment of the Duty generally, and let the Vessel go, until the Decision of the Treasury was known. This was done while many Newport Vessels were discharging their best Coal, without being subject to the Payment of any Duty whatever. My Application to the Treasury was not successful, and Lydney Coal continued to labour under this most grievous Hardship.

Are you at all acquainted with the Stone Coal of Wales?

I am.

Can you state the comparative Weight of the Stone Coal and of the Lydney Coal?

The Stone Coal is a great deal heavier, I believe. There are very few Coals in the Kingdom but I have had through my Hands. I have found in my different Experiments that Cannel Coal possesses a specific Gravity of from 1,100 to 1,200; supposing Water to be considered as 1,000, that would give the Weight per Cubic Foot 68¾ lbs. to 72 lbs. Free burning, or bituminous Coal, I find generally progressing from 1,250 to 1,375, Water being 1,000, which gives the Cubic Feet from 78 to 86 lbs. Stone Coal I found from 1,400 to 1,500, Water being 1,000, which gives the Cubic Feet from 87¾ to 93¾.

What do you consider to be the Weight of Newcastle Coal?

Newcastle Coal I consider to be 1,250, Water being 1,000.

Does the coarser Coal imbibe more Water than the other?

The fatter the Coal the less Water it will imbibe.

Would the bituminous Coal imbibe more Water than the Stone Coal?

I should say that bituminous Coals absorbed less Water than free burning Coal, and nearly the same as Stone Coal.

Is it your Opinion that Coal unbroken imbibes Water?

No; some Coals more than others; but generally speaking, I should say that it is mere Surface Contact; in no Instance do I think there is any Capillary Union between large Coal and Water.

Broken Coal naturally imbibes Water; by having it run amongst it, it makes up into a sort of Paste; but would a large Piece of Walls End Coal taken out of the Pit imbibe Water?

No, I do not think it would; nor do I think Walls End Coal broken small would imbibe Water. There may be two sorts of Union, the Capillary Union, and there may be a Mechanical Union, or a mere Suspension of the Moisture 'till it is exposed to the Air, and Evaporation takes place; I conceive that is the Union which takes place generally between Water and Coal; it is not like that which takes place when Water is thrown upon Lime, and becomes Part of the Solid.

[239]

You have very frequently made Experiments on Coals, have you not?

I have.

Do you see any Objection to the Sale of Coals by Weight instead of Measure, from the Circumstance of the Coal imbibing Wet?

No; for I think this would act as a Premium to send the Coals to Market larger; I think that would act as a Premium to preserve the Coal of a large Size, and there would be less Chance of the Water being mixed with it. If the Carrier of a Cargo of Coal were to drench it with Water, I think that the Buyer would soon detect that, and would either give less for the Coal, or not purchase it at all; and this I consider would effectually prevent its being done.

He would have a Difficulty in delivering a Cargo having been wetted?

Yes; every Vessel makes a small Proportion of Wet in the lower Part; but it would be very easy to detect whether that had been wilfully done.

Which do you consider to be the most valuable Coal; the lightest or the most heavy?

The lightest is generally the most bituminous; the fattest Coal.

If the Duty was collected by Weight instead of by Measure, therefore that would be in favour of the most valuable Coal?

Yes; and very much in favour of the Public.

Would it be also to the Prejudice of the heavier Coal?

To a certain Extent it would.

Is not the most bituminous the most brittle Coal?

I am not aware that that is always the Case; I think there are Exceptions to that.

Can you state the Prejudice to the Public from the Newport Exemption of Duty?

I think that it operates in the Way of opening up Coals at a greater Distance from the Market than they otherwise would be; the Newport Coal travels, on an Average, Twelve to Fifteen Miles by the Tramroads.

You mean to say Collieries have been opened Twelve to Fifteen or Sixteen Miles up the Country in consequence of that Act?

Yes; and that Coal sold at Newport must consequently be dearer than Coals that have only Five or Six Miles to travel to the shipping Port, by the Amount of all the extra Haulage and Tonnage. I, therefore, to this Extent, consider it is an Injury to the Public, in that extra Expence, as well as the private Injury to the Owners of other Collieries.

In point of fact, it has the Effect of narrowing very considerably the Sources of Supply to the Public?

[240]

Clearly so; and also enhancing the Value of Coal to the Consumer, which is clearly made manifest by the Public being obliged to pay 6s. a Ton for small Coal at Newport, when the same may be purchased at Lydney for 3s. 6d. per Ton.

This Act has increased the Number of Collieries in the Neighbourhood of Newport?

Very greatly so; in fact, Newport is now the largest shipping Port in the Kingdom, with the Exception of those in the Wear and the Tyne.

Have you made a Calculation to what Extent the Duty on Coals increases the Price to the Consumer beyond the mere Amount of the Duty?

I have. It would be necessary to state to your Lordships, in the first instance, that the Coals in the Forest of Dean, not being bituminous, and not having a Market for our small Coals, we are obliged to make a very severe Separation of the Coals in the Mine, as we can sell nothing to Profit unless in the State of large Coal; the Consequence is, that in the principal Vein, which is about Six Feet in Thickness, and which would furnish to the Market 6,000 Tons of Coals per Acre if the small Coal could be sold, but, having no Market for that, we are obliged to sacrifice to the Extent of 2,000 Tons per Acre, which is buried in the Gobb or Waste. In order to enable us to bury so large a Quantity, we are compelled to work the Stalls or Headings Double the Width, consequently increasing very much the Expence of getting the Coal. When we have brought the Coal to the Day, as we call it, it undergoes another raking, and about One Ton in Five is again separated from it, thereby increasing the Quantity of waste Coal to 2,800 Tons per Acre, leaving the profitable or saleable Coal only 3,200 Tons per Acre.

Then you mean to say that the Waste, caused indirectly by the Duty on Coal, amounts to very nearly Fifty per Cent.?

[241]

Very nearly; within 200 Tons; and I reckon that, in consequence of that, the Coastwise Duty, and the Detention which necessarily arises out of the Custom House Formalities, which increases our Charges on Freight at least 1s. a Ton on Coal to Bristol and Bridgewater; as Matters stand at present the Cost of our Coal, without reference to its Quality, delivered in Bristol, would be about 6s. 11d. per Ton more than it would cost the Newport Collier. The increased Cost of working, from having no Markets for the small Coal, I reckon as follows; that we pay extra in Price for cutting the Coal, 4d.; for raking and filling, 2d.; loading, 1½d.; extra Timber and Tram Plates, 1½d.; Loss sustained by the small Coal, which in general does not defray the Expence of bringing it out and the Labour bestowed upon it, 3d.; Royalty upon the Coal left in the Mine equal to 4½d. a Ton upon the Coal sold; Colliers Profit on the Coal wasted, 4½d.; upon the Coals sold, an Increase of common Charges, 2d.; making altogether 1s. 11d. per Ton; then there is 1s. a Ton for extra Freight to Bristol on account of the Detention at the Custom House; and the Coastwise Duty, 4s. The Lydney Coal, therefore, stands at 6s. 11d. in the Port of Bristol more than the Newport does, in consequence of the Coastwise Duty, and the Impossibility of finding Markets for the inferior Quality of Coal. Vessels from Newport have a Let-pass, which being exhibited at the Custom House, they have an Order to land their Cargo without any further Trouble. When a Vessel goes from Lydney, there is a Report to the Custom House and a regular Entry to make; the Captain may or may not obtain an Order that Day to unload, depending upon whether a Tidewaiter is at liberty to attend and see the Coal measured; he may perhaps that Day, or the next Day, obtain a Tidewaiter to attend and see his Coal measured; the Tidewaiter attends only Six Hours a Day; if the Vessel is not unloaded in that Time, he walks Home, or he must be induced by some Consideration to remain over to see the Vessel unloaded. In this Way several Tides are necessary to unload a Vessel, which, from Newport, could be unloaded in One Tide. This explains the extra Charge for Freight, which enters into the above Calculation.

Is the Ship unloaded by the Crew, or by Men employed by the Tidewaiters?

I am sorry to say that at Bristol they claim the Privilege of unloading the Vessels; there is a Set of Men take possession of the Vessel, and they make their Charge.

Is that by the Act of Parliament?

I do not understand that it is by Act of Parliament, but by Municipal Regulations; that I believe only attaches to Coal brought in under Duty; I think they do not prevent the Crew unloading their Coals from the Newport Vessels.

That Increase of Charge of 1s. per Ton you last spoke of would apply to all Coals subject to the Coastwise Duty, not to the Lydney Coals only?

Just so; if Coals came from Cardiff they would be subject to the same Detention.

That would apply to Coals in all Parts of the United Kingdom equally?

Yes; but its Consequences are much more important in a short Voyage than in one of considerable Duration. If a Vessel unloads only once a Month, it is of less Consequence than if the same Vessel were to perform Two Voyages in a Week. The Detention occurs so much more frequently in the latter Case; and where Profits are so small as they are in the present Times, we are obliged to make our Calculations very nicely.

Is it the Custom House who claim the Right of unloading, or who?

I believe the Corporation; there are Men appointed who have the Privilege of unloading the Vessels.

You do not know whether it is under special Act at Bristol?

I do not.

Can you inform the Committee as to any particular Circumstances of the partial Application of the Laws which regulate the Size and Quality of the Coals intended to be permitted to be sold subject to the Culm or low Duty?

[242]

Yes; we feel it in this Way; we are in respect of our small Coal subject to a Three-eights Riddle at Lydney. Newport exports without any riddling and any Duty whatever in the Markets within the Severn. The Ports lower down, which are not within the Severn, viz. the Ports of Neath and Swansea, are still permitted, though contrary to the late Regulations, to ship all their small Coal at the lower Duty, and subject nominally to a Twoinch Riddle, which is seldom enforced even of this large Size. I have understood that the late Regulations lessened the Riddle to Three Eighths of an Inch. I do not think it a wise Regulation, but it is the Law of the Land. We complain that we are not at liberty to ship our Coal with the same sized Riddle which is permitted to other Ports trading in the same Markets. I think it is very wise to allow such small Coal as does not bind to go at the lower Duty; but we should all go free alike. In the Year 1828 we did not sell One Ton of Coal of that Description at Lydney, whereas at Neath and at Swansea there was shipped in the Year ending 5th of January 1829, at Swansea 50,688 Tons of small Coals, nominally subject to a Two-inch Screen or Riddle; not a binding Coal, but a free burning Coal; it was shipped under the Denomination of Bastard Culm; it is in an intermediate State between Stone Coal and bituminous Coal; it burns with Flame, and burns easily; it does not adhere much together, but it is much better than that we cannot sell at all at Lydney. In the same Year the Stone Coal Culm exported from the Port of Swansea was 64,104 Tons, subject nominally to a Two-inch Riddle, but which is, I dare say, nearer a Four-inch Riddle; it is in fact no Riddle at all.

How is the Riddle regulated?

Two Inches has been always the Riddle spoken of in the different Acts of Parliament till the recent Regulation, which reduced it to Three Eighths of an Inch.

Is it generally known that the Riddle in the Ports of Swansea and Neath is different from that in your Port?

I cannot say; at one Time the Port of Lydney supplied Bristol with small Coal at the lower Duty, subject to the Two-inch Riddle; but this was put a stop to a good many Years ago by the Custom House. Swansea and Neath, however, have all along retained the Advantage, and still continue to use that Riddle; and not only so, but a Person of the Name of Young, last Year, opened a Colliery of bituminous Coal at Neath; he found he could not sell the small of it at the high Duty, and the Custom House would not let it pass at the lower or Culm Duty; he made Application, however, in London, and had Influence sufficient to get Permission to ship this small Coal at the lower Duty, subject to the Two-inch Riddle, though it is a very excellent Coal. It contains 86 per Cent. of Coke; and the Lydney Coal, which is subject to a Three-eighths Riddle, only 59 per Cent. of Coke. Lately this other Coal, though very superior to the Lydney Coal, has been allowed to be shipped at a lower Duty, though it contains 86 per Cent. of Coke.

Is that Coal shipped at Neath what you call Bastard Coal?

[243]

No; it is better than Bastard Coal; the largest is sold as bituminous Coal; the smaller sold for burning Lime, and other Purposes.

What is that called Bastard Culm?

That is between the Two.

Does it burn with Flame?

Yes, and with a little Smoke.

Is that a Quality which can be used with Steam Engines?

Yes.

What is the Proportion of Coal wasted at Swansea at the Pit's Mouth?

I think there is very little Coal lost there, as they are allowed to ship the small Coal at the low Duty, and subject to a large Riddle.

Have any Applications to the Custom House been made recently from Lydney for a similar Privilege to that of Newport?

No, there has not been recently; several Applications on former Occasions have been made to His Majesty's Government, but with so little Prospect of Success, that we have been suffering patiently for some Years, hoping for the Repeal of the Coastwise Duty.

The Committee have been informed that that which you mention as enjoyed by the Ports of Swansea and Neath have been granted on a recent Application?

No; I stated it, that while we were prevented from the Use of the Two-inch Riddle, that was continued to Swansea and Neath Mr. Young, who had recently offered up a bituminous Coal, was permitted to ship the small Coal of that Vein, subject to the Two-inch Riddle, at the lower Duty.

You rather looked forward to the Repeal of the Coastwise Duty generally, and abstained on that Ground?

Yes; we wished not to prop up so injurious a System, but would rather it fell to the Ground by its own Weight. The System, we conceive, has been injurious to the Coal Owners and to the Country at large.

You mean the System of Coastwise Duty on Coal?

Yes; and the unequal Operation of it. Still we should take it as a great Boon if we were allowed to sell our small Coal, which is being lost to us Year after Year. On former Occasions we applied for the particular Measure, on the Ground of River Navigation, as it is at Newport. This (producing a Plan) is a Map of the Port of Lydney; we are in a great measure shut out of the Western Markets by the Shoots of the Severn and our local Situation. Newport has the Sea before it, and Lydney is inland.

Are you acquainted with the Trade to Ireland in Coals from the Severn and Bristol Channel?

[244]

A little; but we are at Lydney shut out from that Trade; the only Trade we had from Lydney was in consequence of a System of Bounties; but our Company have got so poor, the Quantity of Coal sold diminishing, that we do not carry that on to any Extent.

That Trade is carried on principally from Swansea and Neath, is it not?

I believe there is a considerable Trade to Ireland from those Places.

Can you give any Opinion as to the Cause of the extraordinarily low Price of Coals now?

It arises from Competition, and the great Increase of the Value of Money, I apprehend.

It has been lower within the last Two Months, notwithstanding the Arrangement of the Coal Owners in the North, than any preceding Year; can you state the Reason of that?

No; we are so shut up in the Port of Gloucester, that I feel incompetent to give a decided Opinion upon it.

The Witness delivers in a Paper, which is read, and is as follows:

The Quantities of Coal that came to Newport in the last Year (ending 31st March 1829) by the Canal and by the various Tramroads, including that to Pill, was 476,731 Tons.

(The Accounts of the Monmouth Canal Company are made up to the 31st inclusive.)

Quantity of Coal sold, and shipped to the Westward 256,485 Tons.

The Witness is directed to withdraw.

[245]

Robert William Brandling Esquire is called in, and further examined as follows:

You were commissioned, with some other Gentlemen, to take the Specific Gravities of certain Coal, with a view to making a Report to the House of Commons?

Yes.

Have you in your Possession the Report so made?

I have the original Report, and an examined Copy of it. I went with the Gentlemen alluded to down the Water, and collected Specimens of different Sorts of Coal, put them into separate Bags, and carried them to Mr. Newman's, and assisted in a few of the Examinations as to the Specific Gravities, and can speak to Sir Cuthbert Sharp, Mr. Butler and Mr. Newman having made, with great Attention, all the Experiments stated in this Paper. The Specific Gravities of the Newcastle Coals vary very little; but there is a great Difference between the Specific Gravities of some Welsh Coals and the Newcastle Coals.

Have you taken the Specific Gravity of the Stockton Coal?

I think there were none of those Coals in the River that Day.

The Witness delivers in the same, which is read, and is as follows:

[246-7]

[248-9]

N.B. — The London Chaldron, in all the Calculations used in forming this Table, is taken at Half the Cubical Contents of the Newcastle Chaldron, that being the customary Measure adopted in the Pool. The Newcastle Chaldron contains 232,243 ¹/5 Cubic Inches, or 134 4/10 Cubic Feet; and the London Chaldron is assumed to contain 67 3/10 Cubic Feet. — The Specific Gravities of the different Specimens which were taken on the 24th Ultimo, indiscriminately, from Vessels delivering in the Pool, were ascertained by a Hydrostatic Balance of Mr. Newman's, which weighed to the 1000th Part of a Grain. Distilled Water was used: the Water and the Air in the Room being at a Mean Temperature of 61° of Fahrenheit.

[250]

Do you think the Wet that Coals imbibe would at all influence the Effect, if it should be so directed by the Legislature, of substituting Weight for Measure?

I think it would not; any Quantity of Wet that could be either designedly or accidentally thrown over the Coals would be easily perceptible to the Purchaser or Consumer, and he would be able to protect himself. If the Duty was ascertained at the Place of Shipment, it would be a Protection to the Consumer from that Period to the Coals being burnt, if they passed through Twenty Hands, as it must always be the Interest of the Coal Owner to put them on board dry and large, for the Credit of his Colliery.

With respect to their imbibing Wet, the best Coal unbroken does not, in your Opinion, imbibe Wet?

I think it will imbibe very little indeed; the Brightness of the Coal would be destroyed by Wet, and it would be detected in a Moment.

By Weight being established instead of Measure, there would not be the same Temptation to break the Coals?

It would be a Premium against Breakage, for the Carriers would be able to carry so much more in their Vessels by its being unbroken; it would be also an Encouragement to all the Sellers in every Stage to keep Coals as far as they could unbroken. Wet would have very little Influence on Round Coals as respects Weight.

The Witness is directed to withdraw.

Ordered, That this Committee be adjourned to Monday next, One o'Clock.