Official intervention brought home to us one very heavy wastage. This was in regard to the pulp which we imported. Two different kinds of pulp are produced abroad: The one, produced after the manner practised by our friend the wasp, but by mechanical agency, is known as mechanical pulp; the other, contrived by the aid of chemicals, is commercially known as chemical or sulphite pulp. In so far as the first named was concerned official investigation revealed that the Scandinavian mills were accustomed to send the article in a wet form. Now, seeing that wet pulp comprises 50 per cent. of moisture, it will be seen that the vessels bearing this commodity—and tonnage was severely limited—were really working only to one-half of their actual carrying capacity. With every ton of pulp the ships were compelled to carry one ton of water, and to ship water to Britain is comparable with sending snow to Greenland.
The Scandinavian mills were more than willing to ship wet pulp by the thousands of tons, and the British paper-makers were every whit as ready to receive it. To obtain the raw material in this form facilitated, expedited and cheapened the actual paper-making process. It was another instance of British readiness to sacrifice every other interest upon the altars of cheapness and minimum of effort. The Controller, naturally, demurred against paying freight for the carriage of water which is only too abundant in these islands, and forthwith demanded that the pulp should be sent over in the dry form. In this manner he achieved a laudable object: he doubled the quantity of pulp supplied to Britain without calling upon a further ton of shipping for the purpose.
The pulp-makers of Scandinavia, and the paper-makers of Britain, objected to this rational action. Strong protests were levelled against the new order. The affected interests went to great length to explain that the wet pulp was essential, and advanced their reasons—technical, financial and otherwise, but they failed to upset the decision which had been made. The Controller was not seeking the unattainable, because a certain proportion of dry mechanical pulp has always been shipped to this country. It was merely another instance of affected interests desiring to achieve their respective purposes along the lines of least resistance. In no circumstances, normal or war, can the conveyance of water with raw material to these islands be justifiable.
The reason why the pulp-maker was so anxious to ship his pulp wet was because under such conditions he could market it at a lower figure and dispatch it with greater facility. The paper-maker championed the wet form for the reason that it was more convenient to him; he was able to turn it straightaway into his machines. But when imported dry the pulp must be subjected to certain preliminary treatment which involves time, trouble, and a certain expense. Consequently, out of 100 tons of mechanical pulp normally shipped to Britain, only one ton was in the dry form; the other 99 tons were in the more handy wet form. Certainly there are accepted technical objections to dry pulp. It is brittle and apt to chip. But wet or dry it cannot be used exclusively and solely in the preparation of even the lowest grades of newspaper. A certain proportion of the chemical pulp must be added to impart the requisite degree of firmness and stoutness to the fabric.
A little investigation reveals why the Scandinavian pulp-makers were firmly set upon shipping the pulp wet. In pre-war days the British paper-maker paid from £2 5s. to £2 10s.—$11.25 to $12.50—a ton for the moist pulp delivered at a British port. Freight was a mere bagatelle, averaging about 5s.—$1.25—per ton. To convert the wet into dry pulp prior to shipment the Swedish pulp-makers must use coal. This, thanks to hydro-electric energy, is not required in the fabrication of the actual pulp. But Sweden is deficient in coal resources and compliance with the British official request involved the importation of British coal. Inasmuch as it takes from 1,120 to 1,680 lb. of coal to dry one ton of pulp it will be seen that the Swedish manufacturers were faced with a fuel bill which was likely to run into big figures. Under war conditions British coal was expensive, while quality was subject to wide variation. At that time the coal commanded from £8 to £10—$40 to $50—per ton in Sweden. Consequently, to his disgust, the pulp-maker was confronted with the necessity to incur an extra manufacturing charge ranging from £4 to £8—$20 to $40—per ton of pulp produced.
It is to be feared that the Swedish manufacturers, while anxious to sell as much as possible to, were very reluctant to buy, from these islands. They denounced the British official decree in no unmeasured terms, and sought by every means in their power to secure its withdrawal. But for once British authority was not solicitous of the interests of the foreigner. Recognizing the futility of protest the Scandinavian makers set to work to comply with our demands, and so shipped the pulp in the dry form. We received the benefits accruing from this line of action because we received twice as much pulp as formerly for the same amount of tonnage. True, it cost us more, the price running up to £32—$160—per ton, but it is to be feared that the foreign manufacturers took full advantage of the peculiar situation which prevailed in accordance with that inexorable law of supply and demand, although they maintained that their manufacturing charges were heavily inflated, not only from the purchase of the necessary coal, but from the higher wages which labour demanded. But even at the above figure we derived distinct advantage. Seeing that one ton of dry represented the equivalent to two tons of wet pulp we were really paying at the rate of only £16—$80—per ton, less the sum which had to be deducted from the sale of our coal. Restriction of freight had a good deal to do with the enhanced prices. Only 250,000 tons of shipping a year were allocated to this traffic, and what cost 5s.—$1.25—a ton to ship in 1913 cost £13—$65 per ton in 1918. British ships participating in this trade were thus able to get back something of the heavy prices we paid to the foreigner for an indispensable commodity. But even £32—$160—per ton for dry mechanical pulp contrasted favourably with the chemical pulp, also shipped dry. This, which before the war cost £7 10s.—$37.50—per ton shot up to £47—$235—a ton at one period, and recorded £35—$175—per ton during 1918, while paper, even of the lowest grade, which commanded £10—$50—a ton in 1913, realized £45—$225—per ton in 1918.
Contemporaneously with the adjustment of the various questions pertaining to the Scandinavian pulp and paper, the authorities set to work to develop the domestic raw material industry. Obviously the most promising founts were rags and waste-paper. It was computed that, if these available sources were fully exploited, it would be possible to secure some 300,000 tons of suitable material during the year.
However, it was seen that the first step would be to instil into the minds of the community the necessity to observe rigid economy in the use of paper. Rationing brought home the fact that a paper shortage existed, and, of itself, led users to be more sparing in their uses of this article, in precisely the same way as similar measures effected comparative results in connection with foodstuffs and other commodities. But in so far as paper is concerned it is difficult to preach the gospel of economy; it has been ridiculously cheap and abundant for far too long. Nevertheless much was accomplished, but whether the lessons thus imparted have been taken sufficiently to heart as to become ingrained is problematical. Reversion to former conditions will probably promote a state of affairs as bad as, if not worse than, before.
The wasteful consumption of paper was by no means confined to any particular class of the community. Industry was every whit as improvident. For instance, the soap-making trade naturally absorbs immense quantities of the article, but the manufacturers were shown how, by practising simple saving methods, they might do with 10,000 tons less per year, which, at the prices then prevailing, represented a round £350,000—$1,750,000—per annum. To one firm alone the suggestion represented a possible economy of £75,000—$375,000—a year. What is possible of attainment in the soap-making industry is equally feasible in other trades, especially those identified with provisions. If such broad economies be carried out they could scarcely fail to exercise, under competitive trading conditions, an appreciable influence upon the price of the products concerned. Consequently, paper, as already indicated, has a more or less direct bearing upon the cost of living.
The wastage of paper throughout the country is appalling. Upon the completion of its designed function the material is either burned, consigned to dust-bin, or allowed to pursue an aimless journey at the mercy of the wind through our highways and byways. People of a thrifty turn of mind undoubtedly save their waste, disposing of it at intervals to itinerant collectors, who acquire the litter of the house in exchange for something more or less attractive, if not useful, in kind.