been somewhat similar to that of most of those who have gone in for the
new system. It did not answer very well at first. But after a little
manipulation and experience in the proper working and management, it is
now acting in first rate style, and is saving fuel, with better and more
regular heats; and this although it is not constructed in such a way as
to yield the best possible results, owing to the before mentioned
stipulation having to be considered and allowed for in construction.

In answer to an inquiry I made the other day, the gentleman referred to
informed me that he has now had this setting in operation for six
months. He has three retorts, 14 by 16 inches, and 8 feet long, in an
oven carbonizing 2 cwt. of coal every four hours; the heats are higher
and more regular; and the retorts easier kept clear of carbon. The coke
drawn from the top retort is sufficient for fuel. My oven would hold
four retorts; and the same fuel would heat this number just as well as
the three. I used only the coke from Cowdenheath parrot coal for this
setting; but had to mix it with Burghlee coke for the old system of
setting.

No doubt most of you will have noticed the satisfactory results obtained
by Mr. Hack, of the Saltley Gas Works, Birmingham, and by Mr. McMinn, of
Kensal Green, with the furnaces employed by them for gaseous firing
without recuperation, whereby they are enabled to save fuel and
carbonize more coal per mouthpiece than with the old system. Still they
admit that the saving by this setting is only in fuel, with increased
production, but without any economy of labor--one of the points in favor
of regenerative setting being a saving of at least 25 per cent. in the
latter respect. Even where regenerative settings cannot be had, I think
the system of using gaseous fuel is well worthy the attention of
managers; the expense of altering the existing settings to this method