BLACK SMOKE

Evening Post, Volume CVI, Issue 29, 3 August 1923, Page 10

BLACK SMOKE

SUBJECT OF SEVERAL REPORTS

A HUNDRED YEARS OF DOING

NOTHING.

liondcn is again in the throes of the bl/ick smoke problem, and the rumours that something might be attempted seriously in the way of legislation has resulted in the "fears of industry" being once more well in the limelight, in this; instance through the heoric efforts of the Federation of British Industries, states the "Daily Telegraph." Unfortunately, manufacturers have little to fear on the black smoke question from Governments judging from the records of the past, cen-

The first actual mention of the imoke nuisance in Great Britain is in the year 125/, when Eleanor, the Queen of Henry ill., indignantly refused to live any longer in Nottingham Castle because of the obnoxious black smoke from tile "seacoles burnt in the town below, and went off in a huff to live at Tutbury Oastle. As is well known, Echvard I. made a great effort to stop the use of coal m London, issuing his famous proc amation in 1307, and about this time at least one man is said to "have been hanged for persisting in the crime of burning coal. However, the shortage of wood rendered the use of coal imperative, and Great Britain had-to endure a moderate-but still very objectionable -amount of smoke for the next five centuries. The invention of the steam engine and the inauguration of the industrial era began, about 1010, to render the smoke musance intolerable, with short chimneys belchiny forth dense smoke from small bailer plants sup plying steam engines, fJ f which 100 horse power was regarded as a very large

ifiiq 1* °n Con7mons appointed in 1819 a Select Committee to consider the whole question, and a f urther commit . tee in 1822, and the accounts of these nrsfc proceedings make almost identical reading with the "proceedings of to-day. The principles of black smoke formation and prevention were explained clearly by various technical witnesses; it was pointed out that by simple means the trouble could be largely, if not entirely • prevented; the committee recommended that, steps be taken, the manufacturers made a great uproar and said their business would be ruined at once .if any legislation was introduced, and the Government let the matter drop This, in a few words, is the concise history of black smoke legislation in Great Britain for the past 100 years. ID Anothei" committee was appointed in 1843, and the report of this committee, 240 large pages, is by far the most interesting and valuable document that has ever appeared on the subject. A Bill introduced in the House of Commons as a result was thrown out; another committee appointed in 1845, the Government's own modest Bill was then withdrawn; a Special Committee of Dr Lyoi* Playfair and Sir Thomas ds la Beche appointed in 1853, nothing done; then Lord Palmerston's Acts of 1853 aud 1856, the Public Health Act of 1075, and so on through the whole dreary story. During the entire period, including the present time, th« Governments of the day have never made the slightest attempt to consider the question at all seriously. The facts with regard to black smoke are perfectly simple. There is no known method ,of preventing black •smoke,entirely with the use of coal and similar'fuel containing about 15 per cent, of volatile matter. By adopting reasonable methods, however, at least 75 per cent, of industrial smoke can be prevented, but the manufacturer in gen eral has always refused to do this by taking the fullest advantage of the fact that all smoke cannot be eliminated, and using this as an excuse for doing nothing at all. It is high time that such people began to consider that, whilst it is true they are able to point with triumph to the fart that the complete solution is impossible on present knowledge, we are not on this account going on for ever allowing industries wantonly to injure the whole country to the extent of millions of pounds per annum when a large amount of this damage can be prevented now.