> ' ' ' J ' ' ' ■ , Great Economy in Cost of Production, AND SUPERIORITY OF ARTICLE SECURED AT THE SAME TIME. WM, F. MURPHY'S SONS, 339 CHESTNUT ST., AND 55 SOUTH FOURTH ST. 1866. UNlVEFSJTYOf BOOKSTACKS CONTENTS. PAGE. Intkodhctoet, 5 The Process, and the Advantages Claimed, ..... 5 Questions and Answers Explanatory of the Patent Petroleum Gas, - - - 6 " Relative to Foul Odor, ..... 6 " " Danger of Life and Property, ... 6 " " its component parts, .... Q " " Management of Works, .... 7 " " " the Deterioration of the Gas, ... 7 " " Quantity and Quality, . . _ . 7 "■•^ " " Construction of Apparatus, ... 7 '• " Alteration of Gas Works, - - - - 8 " " Economy of Production of Gas, - 8 " its adaptation to general use, . -- . 9 " " Supply of Petroleum, - 9 Enhanced Value of Oil, - - - - 10 " Dangers of Explosion, - - - - 10 " Insurance, - - - - . - 10 " " the Invention, - - - - . Xl Corroborative data, - - - . - . . -11 \o Scientific and Legal Opinions, &c,- - - - . . . H Weight of Product of Material, - - - - . . . 12 _f Saving of Expense, &c., - - - . . . . . ^3 ^ Comparative Cost, - - - - . . . . -13 ^ Use of Salisbury's Gas no bar to Insurance, ..... ^4 y Cost of Gas and Clogging of Works, - - - - - . - 14 o What Philadelphia would Save, - - - - . . . I5 Pennsylvania Gas Companies, - - - - . . _ - 15 Charter of Pennsylvania Petroleum Gas Company, - - . . 17 Conclusion, - to * 4 INTRODUCTORY How to obtain the best and cheapest light and heat, has been patter of thought and study in all ages, among practical and scientific people. Entering largely into the wants and comforts of society, much time, and great amount of means, have been appropriated to this purpose, in the hope of securing these invaluable desiderata. It is, perhaps, needless to say, when every consumer is complaining of cost and quality of the article at present furnished, that, as yet, the public are not in the enjoyment of a proper remedy or substi- tute. This deprivation, however, it is believed, need no longer be suffered or submitted to. The object of this paper is to give, as briefly as possible, incontrovertible facts and reasons for this belief. Shortly after the discovery of the large deposits of petroleum, the best scientific knoAvledge of the country was brought to bear upon the subject of the uses to which this new commodity could be applied. Inventive talent, always ready to seize hold of that which promises profit and convenience, saw in it material that would supplant, or take the place of bituminous coal, in the production of Light and Heat. Patient investigation, and innumerable experiments, have developed the fact that it can be converted into gas of the greatest brilliancy, purity and power, adapted alike to the illumination of all descriptions of buildings, and the heating of them at the same time, in a manner infinitely better and cheaper, the discoverer of the process alleges, than coal produces. The reader himself will be able to determine whether this be so or not. The most skeptical, if due weight be given to the facts herein presented, will be likely to have their minds disabused or relieved of doubt upon the subject. THE PROCESS .AND THE ^DV^ISTT^QES CLAIMED. Mr. S. C. Salisbury, of New York, is the patentee of the process by which this great change or improvement is effected. He has, he contends — and practical tests sustain him in the assertion — by skillfully combining with his own discoveries the available ideas of others, produced a simple and efficient apparatus, with which the use of coal is virtually superseded. His process of manufacturing gas, on this principle, can be applied, with equal facility to the family wants of small private residences, to the requirements of a hotel, ster.mboat, railroad car, or place of entertainment, or to the demands of a large city — such as Philadelphia. In its working, he says, it is so free from intricacy or danger that its management may be confided to any one of common intelligence, without the slightest fear of accident. The gas can be distributed over a house through the pipes and burners now in service; it can be as readily lighted, shut off and controlled as the ordinary coal gas, and the app;iratus is so arranged as to preclude the possibility of explosion. The flame of this gas is larger from a three feet burner than that of coal gas from a five feet burner ; it is far whiter and more brilliant, and is less than one-half of the cost. 2-(5) 6 Thus comprehensive in its adaptation to the wants of the people, it is no idle remark, in alleging that it will do away with the necessity of the extensive consumption of coal. Mr. Salisbury, in fact, claims that his petroleum gas commends itself to general use — 1st. For its brilliancy or illuminating powers. 2d. For its intensity of heat — for accommodating buildings, and for culing-ry purposes. 3d. For its exemption from foul odors. 4th. For its economy in large and portable Gas Works. 5th. For its cheapness in the light and heat secured. 6th. And for its freedom from danger in the use of the gas. Once convinced that these advantages are real and practical, all classes will avail themselves of this patent petroleum gas. QXJESTIOI^S A^ISTD ANSWERS EXFLA.ISrA.TORY OF MR. SALISBXJRY'S PROCESS. In order to elicit the truth, as well as to anticipate the inquiries of such persons as may think of using this gas, the purchasers of the right for the State of Pennsylvania, propounded, a short time since, a number of interrogatories to the patentee, Mr. Salisbury. They are given below, with his answers. A perusal of the questions and answers cannot fail to impress the intelligent mind most favorably with the patent gas ; for they clearly and fully establish the points of advantage claimed. RELATIVE TO FOUL ODOR. 1. Question. — Will the manufacture of gas in your apparatus create disagreeable odor, making the place in which it is manufactured offensive, or any other part of the building offensive ? Answer. — It can be generated in a parlor. The purifying process of coal gas is mainly to remove the sulphur and ammonia, none of which exist in any quantities in petroleum ; therefore no lime is required, and consequently none of the foul odors in the manufacture of coal gas can arise in the gas made from crude oil. RELATIVE TO DANGER OF LIFE AND PROPERTY. 2. Question. — Will it — should there be any breakage — form an explosive mixture, making it dangerous to life and property ? Answer. — None whatever different from coal gas ; in fact, from the superior richness of petroleum gas in carbon, it is less dangerous, when confined in a body and brought in contact with a light, than coal gas, because in its combustion it cannot absorb as much oxygen. RELATIVE TO ITS COMPONENT PARTS. 3. Question. — What are the component parts of the gas made from petroleum, or in what^way"does it differ from gas made of bituminous coal ? 7 Answer. — It differs in its combinations from coal gas, and, being a bi-carbon, and having a specific gravity of .960 to .980, possesses three times the lighting power usually found in the best coal. Being free from sulphur, and having strong heating powers, makes an excellent fuel for summer cooking. RELATIVE TO MANAGEMENT OF WORKS. 4. Question. — What kind of management is required to use the apparatus properly ? Can any person manage it, or will it require an experienced person? Answer. — Any machinist with ordinary ability, or any intelligent person with proper tuition, can manage small works. In larger works, however, it would be better to employ competent men. Petro- leum gag works, owing to their simplicity, require less skill than coal gas works, both in their construction and operation. RELATIVE TO DETERIORATION OF THE GAS. 6. Question. — Will the gas condense, by being kept on hand any time, or will it hold its own, as coal gas does? Answer. — The petroleum being a permanent, fixed gas, by the destruction of many of the elements contained in the oil, when subjected to heat, cannot condense. The petroleum gas has retained its fixedness, burnt as well, and suffered no deterioration whatever when eleven days in the holder, as if consumed the day on which it was made. These observations were noted during the coldest days in January last. RELATIVE TO QUANTITY AND QUALITY. 7. Question. — How much less of this gas will give the same illuminating power that one thousand cubic feet of coal gas gives ? Answer. — In the tables prepared by this Company, ( — " Salisbury's American Petroleum Gas Com- pany, N. Y. — ) it has invariably compared a 2 foot burner consuming petroleum gas with a 5 foot burner consuming coal gas, as being fully its equal in size of flame, and its superior in brilliancy of light. Thus, where 1,000 cubic feet of coal gas is required, 400 cubic feet of petroleum gas will be sufficient. In all scientific tests with the photometer, the power of the light from petroleum is more than 3 to 1. Dr. Pig- got's report will give all the details upon this subject. RELATIVE TO CONSTRUCTION AND APPARATUS. 8. Question. — What will it cost, all complete, to erect an apparatus of sufficient capacity to manufac- ture 20,000 cubic feet of gas in 24 hours, or any quantity under that amount in the same proportion ? Answer. — Coal gas works affording a daily supply of 25,000 cubic feet, would suSice for a city of 8,000 to 9,000 inhabitants. Works of the same capacity, using petroleum, would supply a population of 25,000. These could be constructed from 25 to 35 per cent, cheaper than coal gas works — ranging from ^20,000 to $25,000, without the ground. It is difficult to give any estimate that would be of any value, until an examination of locality is first made. 8 RELATIVE TO ALTERATION OF GAS WORKS. 9. Question. — What would be the probable cost of altering gas works from coal to petroleum, where 60,000 cubic feet are made daily ; or, what would it cost to change the Philadelphia Gas Works from its present mode of manufacturing gas to your mode of manufacturing gas, where 3,000,000 cubic feet are required to be produced daily ? Answer. — The cost of changing coal gas works now storing 60,000 cubic feet daily, to petroleum gas that will hold the same quantity, would not be over $5,000 to $7,000 — the alterations being chiefly in the retorts and setting them. In relation to changing the mode of making gas in works like those in Philadelphia, it is impossible to give an idea without personal inspection, although the exchange of retorts would not cost exceeding $30,000. But in large works there will be many other heavy expenses ; besides, in your city, the gas is made in separate works, miles apart. An approximate idea may be gathered in the first part of my reply. I might add that there are two ways in which coal gas works can largely increase the brilliancy of their gas, without any material cost of production. One is, to make one-third cf the daily product petroleum gas and two-thirds coal gas. This would raise the power of the two gases combined to 23 candles, or eight more than the standard for the best coal gas. The other is to make a lesser quantity of gas and make it all from petroleum, and bring up the required daily product of gas by mixing with it atmospheric air, never allowing the power of luminosity in the gas to fall below 20 candles. The cost would be very trifling in comparison with coal gas ; and would remove the many causes of complaint made by consumers against gas companies, both on account of the inferiority of the light furnished in coal gas, and the foul odors arising from its purification. RELATIVE TO ECONOMY OF PRODUCTION OF GAS. 10. Question. — How much more economical and superior is your gas to that which is manufactured from coal or any other substance as yet introduced and in use ? Answer. — Coal being almost exclusively used in gas making, it is not easy to draw any analogy between it and any other material that can be used, other than what this Company has done with petroleum in its experimental works and tests. From these tests and experiments, it is able to state the prime cost to works, say capable of producing 23,000 cubic feet in 2J: hours, which is as follows: 6| galls. Oil (maximum) 25 cts. gall, and cartage, - - - $1 68 Fuel for retort, 19 Labor in making, 20 Superintendence, - 17 ■ $2 24 }th. value of empty bbl., worth $1 50, is - - - - 25 Less cartage and labor, - -- -- - 1 24 Cost of 1,000 cubic feet petroleum gas, . - . . $2 00 This is about the cost of 1,000 cubic feet coal gas, delivered into the gas-holder, with coal at $11 40 in the yard ; but in point of economy with consumers, it is equal to 3,000 cubic feet of coal gas in ordinary burning, or 66fc. 1,000 cubic feet. 9 RELATIVE TO ITS ADAPTION TO GENERAL USE. 11. Question. — Is it adapted to private as well as general use; that is, to manufacture it either in private houses or at regular works for cities and villages ? (name in this connexion cost of apparatus for private dwellings.) Answer. — It is adapted in portable works to Dwelling Houses,' Fapto?;'r?s.;:, Hotels, Saloons and Restaurants, Offices, Theatres, Newspaper establishments. Railroad StatibilbVlStore-S Vr'd S-hops, and in fact in any other place when the quantity of gas consumed makes it lin^qlvjeDt to th'e, consumer. Apparatus capable of making and storing 50 cubic feet at one time, all complete will cost $S25 to $350o* . This will give light for eight burners for three hours, but if gas is made in it as required dpi'i^ig' tte ;6ven'ing it will accom- modate thirty to forty burners. One of double the capacity to store gas would only cost |jy50 to $75 more, and would supply sixteen burners from gas made at one time, for three hours. Another size that will make and store 300 feet at one time, will cost 675 to $700. 500 " " " " 875 to $900. 750 " " " " 1050 to $1075. 1000 " " " " 1175 to $1200. RELATIVE TO SUPPLY OF PETROLEUM. 12, Question. — If your gas be generally introduced, what data have you to show that the production of petroleum will be equal to the demand, for this purpose alone, and also, to show that the permanency of the production may be relied upon ? Answer. — Prof. Hayes, on behalf the U. S. Revenue Commission, in his report as Chairman, states that there are 197 farms in Venango County, Pennsylvania, having on them 741 producing wells, — 465 that could produce, if sufficient inducements were given, and 1,868 non-producing wells; — Total, 3,069 wells. On six farms on Pithole Greek, there are several wells, producing upon an average 140 barrels each day; how many he does not say. On the remaining fifty-five farms there are 571 wells that yield on an average, 16-f barrels per day to each well. The 465 wells can yield upon an average five barrels per day to each well. These would aggregate a supply of 12,682 barrels per day, or, for 313 days, nearly 4,000,000 barrels in a year. These wells being worked at irregular periods, the supply, of course, is not as large. The quantity accounted for in 1865 is not far from 2,700,000 barrels, — not including the stock raised and in tanks at the place of production, viz : — Converted into refined, 1,746,166 Crude shipped to Europe, - - - - - - - - 136,709 Stocks of crude on hand 1st January, 1866, 262,000 Wasted en route and used, 200,000 Difference between what was ascertained to be the production in the conversion into refined, and the duties paid on crude, $1 00, per bbl., 351,731 Balance, . 2,696,606 * Works or apparatus, slightly varied, for houses, &c., can be procured at about 70 per cent, of this cost ; but it is deemed best to adopt such as are here referred to. 3 lO As to the permanency of supply, or the quantity of oil underlying the surface, one man's opinion is as good as another's. Admitting the oil is there, and in other parts of the country, in a supply to the extent . of even 3,000,000 barrels, let us see how it would be affected if the whole 450 gas works in the United States should ignore coal and adopt petroleum. Last year these 450 works produced in coal gas in round numbers 10,000,000,000 cubic feet. New York producing one-fifth, and Philadelphia, Brooklyn, Boston and vicinity, Baltimore, Cincinnati M>d Chicago,' three-tenths, — these seven cities with an aggregate population of 3,000,000, making and cons'utiiing one-half of all the gas in the United, States. Assuming that 4,000,000,000 'cubic feet of petroleum gas 'would ^^ive iv'e 's'fme illuminating power to the burners, it follows that 625,000 barrels of oil would be all tliaf 'is required to supply the 450 gas works. To carry this still further and put at rest all questions as to the'si^.ffi'crehey-o'f'oil; we will assume the mean population of the United States to be 34,000,000, the quantity of petroleum gas necessary to supply this number of inhabitants upon the same basis, would be 450 cubic feet to each person, or, 15,300,000,000 cubic feet, requiring for its manufacture 2,550,000 barrels of oil, and the erection of some 12 to 1,500 additional gas works. RELATIVE TO ENHANCED VALUE OF OIL. 13. Question. — If thus generally used for gas would not the price or value of petroleum be so much enhanced that there would be no economy in its manufacture, as compared with other gas ? Ans?ver. — The substance of this question is answered in the preceding interrogatory, assuming that crude oil reaches $1 00 per gallon ; the cost of 1,000 cubic feet of petroleum gas would be $6 85, — equivalent to 3,000 cubic feet of coal gas, costing (^3 50 per 1000) $10 50, — then 35 per cent, cheaper than coal gas, besides a superior light. To show that the absorption of crude oil for gas on so general a scale as to take 2,550,000 barrels, could not have a corresponding effect upon the price of the crude oil, it must be borne in mind that 727,000 barrels of refined oil, requiring about 950,000 barrels of crude to produce it, was consumed in its fluid state. If consumed in a gas, the effect upon price would be merely nominal. RELATIVE TO DANGERS OF EXPLOSIONS. 14. Question. — Is benzine, or anything of an objectionable or explosive character, produced in the manu- facture of your gas, and if so, please state the nature of it, and how dangers are to be avoided ? Answer. — None, whatever. All the ingredients composing the oil in its original state are vaporized and pass into the retort in that form and become a fixed gas. The vaporizer is used to economize in the production of gas, there being as many as four specific gravities to the oil. RELATIVE TO INSURANCE. 15. Question. — Should the manufacture of it in houses, by reason of danger, if any, in its production or uses, increase the rate of insurance? 15. Answer. — I see no reason why it should, for the quantity brought into any house for the purpose of making gas need never exceed what is usually brought in to burn in its fluid state; should a larger quantity be required, it can be kept outside the building. A furnace can be so constructed as will guard against all risk from fire. The danger really, with care, is not as great as handling oil to fill the same number of burners in lamps. 11 RELATIVE TO THE INVENTION. 16. Question. — Is the manufacture of gas from crude petroleum your own invention, or does it embrace a combination of patents ; and if a combination, whose inventions are embraced in the manufacture of the gas? Answer. — This company own several patents, — one for mixing air into the gas, another for carbur- reting gas, another for making gas, partially adopted in my combination. The process of making gas from petroleum is solely my invention. Mr. Latrobe, of Baltimore, has examined fully into this subject and pro- nounced a favorable opinion upon my patent. Though unnecessary to offer additional remarks in support of the Salisbury process for manufacturing gas, it is no more than right, while upon the subject, to give data corroborative of what has been said. It may serve, at least, to weaken, if not divest, people of prejudices against improvement upon the old order of things, and thus pave the way for a general introduction, in a vastly superior shape, of one of the prime necessities of civilized life. Anything tending in this direction cannot be esteemed otherwise than as a public benefit, and hence the reader must tolerate that which he would regard as prolixity, in the treatment or discussion of other ordinary subjects. As applicable, therefore, to the value of Mr. Salisbury's process, further facts and evidence are given below : ^ SCIENTIFIC AND LEGAL OPINIONS RELATIVE TO QUALITY OF GAS AND VALUE. OF PATENTS. Abraham Myers, Esq., Assistant Engineer of the Philadelphia Gras Works, having made examination and test, at New York, of Mr. Salisbury's process, reports as follows : " I find that it is, in quality, one hundredand fifty (150) per cent, superior to that produced by the New York .Gas Com- pany, against which the tests were made ; or, in other words, TWO cubic feet of the Petroleum Gas is equal to FIVE cubic feet of that of coal gas. " Its illuminating powers are, as compared with coal gas, as follows: " New York Coal Gas standard, 14 candles. " Petroleum Gas standard, 35 candles. " Yours respectfully, (Signed) A. MYERS." Dr. Piggot, of Baltimore, a distinguished chemist, at the instance of parties of that city, also thoroughly tested the mode of making the gas, as well as the quality of the light produced by it. He reported that — "The gas thus manufactured was subjected to photom.etrical tests, in comparison with that furnished by the New York Gas Company. It cannot be doubted," he adds, "that the new process is a VALUABLE ADDITION TO OUR RESOURCES FOR ILLUMINATION, AND HIGHLY TO BE COMMENDED BOTH FOR BRILLIANCY OF LIGHT AND ECONOMY OF PRODUCTION. Since, for ordinary burning, two (2) cubic feet of this petroleum gas gives a light 80 much greater than five. (5) cubic feet of ordinary coal gas, it follows that, at the same price per thousand, the expense of the new light will be only ONE-FOURTH of that of the gas in common use. But at present rates this gas can be 13 manufactured * * * so that its ACTUAL COST WILL NOT EXCEED ONE-SIXTH of the sum now paid for coal gas. These estimates are, of course, based on the present price of petroleum, and on the hypothesis of home manufacture (for dwellings, factories, hotels, &c.) If served to the consumer by a company, their profit must, of course, be added; hut they could certainly SUPPLY THE PUBLIC AT ONE-HALF THE PRESENT PRICE OF GAS, and then have abundant room for a handsome margin." John H. B. Latrobe, Esq., of Baltimore, one of the leading Patent lawyers of the United States, em- ployed by Baltimoreans, who subsequently purchased the right of Maryland, to examine the title to the Patents, gives the following opinion : " The invention (of Mr. Salisbury) I regard as sufficiently described in the specification, and the claims for the differ- ent elements, in their various combinations, are broad enough for all practical purposes. * * * With some experience in the use of gas, at my residence in the country, I SEE NO REASON WHY THE SALISBURY PATENT SHOULD NOT BE A SUCCESS. That the elements employed are novel in their combination is to be presumed, from the fact that the Patent Office passed the claims ; and should litigation test the Patent as to form and legal requisites, I am of opinion it would stand. So far, then, as the TITLE TO THE PATENTS in question goes, I regard it as ALTOGETHER SUFFI- CIENT. So far as the Patents themselves are concerned, they are, in point of law, in due form, and SUFFICIENT TO PROTECT WHAT THEY DESCRIBE AND CLAIM. So far as my information goes, in point of utility, my general knowledge of the subject, and some partial personal experience, dispose me to THINK MOST FAVORABLY OF THE PLAN that has been submitted to me, and which the Patents are relied upon to protect." Hekry O'Rielly, Esq., — distinguished by reason of his connexion with the American Telegraph Lines — has taken hold of the Salisbury Patent Petroleum Gas enterprise with his accustomed zeal and energy, and offers to supply the city of Brooklyn with better light, at FORTY per cent, below the present price now paid the Coal Gas Companies for the same service. After making the offer, he adds : "Friends with whom I became familiar through all parts of the land, when establishing the First Range of Tele- graph that connected the diflTerent sections of the United States, and during my long service connected with the Press and the Public Improvements, will probably feel assured that I would not thus address them, if I were not fully satisfied of the great public benefits that must flow from these new and important uses of the most wonderful natural production of this or any age. "Enterprising men, in all parts of the Union, may find their interest in QUICKLY EXAMINING THIS SUBJECT." On these subjects the following reply, to inquiries of Mr. O'Rielly, presents the facts in the plainest and strongest way : — My Dear Sir : In reply to your communication of this morning, I have the honor to submit the following for your information : One ton (2,000) lbs. of good coal will make eight thousand (8,000) cubic feet of Illuminating Gas. The weight of the Petroleum required to produce an equal number of cubic feet will vary from 350 to 400 pounds, (50 to CO gallons,) according to the quality of the oil. But this 8,000 cubic feet of gas which is distilled from the 350 or 400 pounds of Crude Petroleum will give almost as much light as 24,000 (twenty-four thousand) cubic feet of the gas produced from the Coal, as above referred to. Six thousand (0,000) lbs. of Coal are required to produce as much light as the 350 or 400 pounds of Petroleum.' I am, Sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant, GEORGE PIOWARD ELLERS, Chief Engineer. To Henrv O'Rielly, Esq., New York. 13 WHICH MAY BE EFFECTED BY INTBODUCING THE PETROLEUM GAS MADE UNDER PATENTS OWNED BY THE PENNSYLVANIA PETROLEUM GAS COMPANY. The following tabular statements, deduced from careful consideration of the quantity of light required in various branches of public and private use, are applicable here, as illustrations of the SAVING- OF EXPENSE that may be made by the introduction of the SALISBURY PETROLEUM GAS, in contrast with the expense of the Coal-G-as now commonly used. These calculations, it may be remarked in passing, have reference only to the use of the Salisbury Gas for lighting, and not for heating or culinary purpose; . Were these latter purposes included, the advantages of the new article would appear in a still stronger light. The table was prepared by the Secretary of the Salisbury Am. Petroleum Gas Company. MEAN ANNUAL SAVINGS BY THE FOLLOWING CONSUMERS. For What Purpose. No. of Lights. Saving of Co&t. Days Used. Hotels, - 1,000 $7,528 12 365 Dwellings, 40 265 72 365 Theatres, 400 5,547 10 283 Factories, 400 4,248 20 156 Saloons, - 70 1,360 40 313 Public Buildings, - - - - 200 3,273 04 340 Churches, ........ 40 35 77 52 Colleges, 200 3,959 52 365 Boarding Schools, 40 335 80 365 Fex'ry Houses, - - Stores, Wholesale, 30 1,153 04 365 100 821 00 156 Stores, Retail, Markets, 50 738 68 313 250 1,614 15 165 Street Lamps, 10,000 200,000 00 345 Public Parks, -------- 250 11,667 50 365 Newspaper Offices, - - 160 2,969 12 313 Offices, --------- Railroad Depots, 30 218 70 180 20 760 56 313 Railroad Cars and Trains, now using oil, 6 cars. 490 14 313 Ferry Boats, Steamboats, 40 lights. 1,086 04 365 100 1,411 20 245 COMPARATIVE COST. The various means of illumination, now in use, cost at the following rates per hour : — Cents. Mills. Tallow candles, .---32 Stearine candles, - - - - 4 8 Composition candles, - - - 4 6 Adamantine candles, - - - 5 2 Spermaceti candles, - - - 6 7 German wax candles, — (stearic acid,) 8 5 Wax candles, - - - - - 10 4 Refined whale oil, - - - - 4 2 4 Sperm oil. Lard oil, - - - - Elephant oil, - - - - Coal oil, . - - - Petroleum oil, - Camphene spirits, - - - Coal gas (5 feet burner,) Petroleum gas (5 feet burner,) Cents, Mills. 6 1 CO 2 4 9 2 5 1 1 5 4 1 8 0 7 14 USE OF SA-LISBUHY'S GA^S NO Bi^H TO Ignorant of the process of manufacturing gas from Crude Petroleum, under Mr. Salisbury's patent, many people may suppose that apprehended danger would keep Insurance Companies from taking risks upon buildings in which the gas is made and used. This objection or difficulty occurring to the minds of the purchasers of the right for Pennsylvania, they wrote Mr, Salisbury in relation to it, and received the following letter addressed to him by the Engineer of the " Salisbury American Petroleum Gas Company," — a corporation organized in New York on Mr. Salisbury's patents, — which should be conclusive on this point, viz : — Engineer's Office S. A. P. Gas Co., "1 243 Broadway. / New York, March 28, 1866. Dear Sir: — In reply to your comnmnication of this A. M., I beg to say that the Companies insuring this building are the "Irving," "Mechanics' and Traders'," "Greenwich," "Park," "Liverpool and London," "Globe," and "Merchants'." The rates of insurance on this building have noi been increased by reason of the presence herein of our small gas-works, nor can I imagine why they should be; — no accident can possibly take place from the gas itself, nor is there within 75 per cent, as much danger from tire as is daily incurred in every house containing a furnace for heating the premises. Yours, most trulj'-, GEORGE HOWARD ELLERS, Engineer. S C. Salisbury, Esq. It is proper to remark that the building referred to in the foregoing letter is one of the most valuable on Broadway, and is occupied, not only with the Salisbury Patent Apparatus, in almost constant operation, but is used for banking and insurance business. COST OF aA.s ANT) OLOGaii