Search Documents

A plan which has just been approved by President Wilson, by, the Secretary of the Navy, and the Naval Consulting Board, provides for the active cooperation of the Associated Advertising Clubs of the World with the 30,000 engineers who will soon undertake the task of making a card index survey of American industry, so that it may be prepared for national defense, if need comes. Herbert S. Houston, President of the Associated Clubs of the World comments on the plan. "Through the great power of advertising we expect-to arouse manufacturers, workingmen, businessmen, in fact the whole country, to the vital need of making industry the basic line of defense so that, if necessity arises, it can supply munitions quickly and abundantly. "This is not a war measure, but a peace measure. The militarist will support it and so will the pacifist, as well as the great body of Americans in between. So the slogan `national defense and international peace, has been adopted believing that the two causes will be best served by linking them together. "While the primary thing, of course, is service to the country, it is manifest that this work of the engineers will be of the greatest service to industry in times of peace. If industry is mobilized for defense, it will be placed on a basis of efficiency to meet the keen competition that will surely follow the present war." Howard E. Coffin, one of the leaders of the American automobile industry, in outlining the far-reaching plans of his committee, the Committee of Industrial Preparedness of the Naval Consulting Board, said: "At the outset I wish to emphasize the absolutely non-partisan nature of this work. I am not even familiar with the political affiliations of the great majority of the members of the Board or of my committee. In setting out to, mobilize the industrial resources of the United States, we are concerned only with the benefit to the nation, and to that end we have called into being an organization made up of the best technical and business brains of the country, and that organization will work along business lines with strictly business methods. I think it reasonable to say that this is a movement perhaps unique in the history of national governments, and one geared up to the highest standards of twentieth century efficiency. "It is vitally necessary that American industry be made aware of the part it must play in the national defense. Our whole conception of warfare has been changed almost overnight. Our military heads at Washington are largely, of course, graduates of the very best technical schools, have been taught the profession of fighting, and are masters of that profession. As members of the Naval Consulting Board, we are unable to tell these men how to do their work. But while these departmental heads have lived with military problems all their adult years, we on the other hand have slept and eaten and lived with the industrial problems of the country. The two questions are wholly distinct, and the masters of one cannot possibly be the masters of the other. We are confronted then with the necessity of interlocking these two vast elements of our national life into a great working organization for the national defense. It is that which we are about to do.

Jan 5, 1916

The total number of applications brought before the Committee during the year 1916 was 962; the total number, of persons who were elected, and became members of the Institute during the wane period was 750. The total membership of the Institute on. Dec. 31, 1916, was. 5,781, consisting of 19 Honorary Members, 5,246 Members, 215 Associate Members, and 301 Junior Members. The changes in membership during the year are shown on the accompanying schedule:

Jan 2, 1917

Jan 1, 1941

Jan 1, 1941

Jan 1, 1949

The Joint Committee (consisting of the chairmen of the several society committees), formed under the authority of the five societies, in order to facilitate the carrying out of the organization of an engineer reserve as part of the military forces of the United States, for which work it was appointed, now begs leave to report as follows: .The Committee has been in personal communication with the Secretary of War, the officers of the General Staff, the officers of the War College, and with the Hon. George E. Chamberlain, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Military Affairs, and the Hon. James Hay, Chairman of the House Committee on Military Affairs. As the result of these interviews there has been incorporated in the draft of the legislation proposed by the Secretary of War and included also in the bills drawn by the committees of the Senate and of the House a provision for the organization of an officers reserve on broad lines, including an engineer reserve. As now drawn these bills provide that an officer shall be commissioned for a period of five years with rank up to and including that of major, after passing such requirements of character and qualifications as shall be prescribed by the President. The bill also provides that a certain amount of duty with pay shall he performed each year by the officers in the reserve. . The Committee is waiting for the Navy Department to formulate its plans for the increase in the naval forces, and as soon as a decision has been reached by that Department and the Committee is in possession of the facts, the Committee will take up the question of the organization of an engineer reserve for the navy, similar to that contemplated for the army.

Jan 2, 1916

Executive A R LEDOUX, Chairman ARTHUR S DWIGHT CHARLES F RAND E P MATHEWSON J V W REYNDERS Membership E DEGOLYER, Chairman W Y WESTERVELT, Vice-chairman WILLIAM H BASSETT H G MOULTON C MINOT WELD Finance WALTER H ALDRIDGE, Chairman GEORGE D BARRON GALEN H CLEVENGER Library GEORGE C STONE,' Chairman JOHN H JANEWAY ALEXANDER C HUMPHREYS, ROBERT LINTON FREDERICK F SHARPLESS

Jan 1, 1923

C. M. Kay, Chairman L. W. Moore, Post Chairman C. W. Conn, Vice-Chairman R. W. Shearman, Secretary-Treasurer BLAST FURNACE, COKE OVEN, AND RAW MATERIALS COMMITTEE F. C. Anderko, Chairman James Chisholm, Past Chairman W. F. Huntley, Senior Vice-Chairman W. O. Bishop, Vice-Chairman R. W. Shearman, Treasurer D. C. Brown, Secretary IRON AND STEEL DIVISION Gerhard Derge, Chairman J. J. Golden, Past Chairman B. M. Larsen, Chairman-Elect R. W. Shearman, Secretary-Treasurer THE METALLURGICAL SOCIEN OF AIME J. S. Smart, Jr., President C. C. Long, Past President K. L. Fetters, Vice-President T. D. Jones, Treasurer R. W. Shearman, Secretary

Jan 1, 1961

Jan 1, 1947

Jan 1, 1947

Jan 1, 1940

Jan 1, 1940

Jan 1, 1943

Jan 1, 1943

By James M. Barker

No commodity agreements now exist for sulfur and a lack of reference to sulfur commodity agreements exists in the literature. Law (1975) made a passing reference to sulfur as one of a group of commodities where "there have been additional control efforts of various types." Clearly, sulfur was a candidate, at least conceptually in the past, for some form of commodity agreement and the following discussion centers on the world sulfur market of the early 1980's in this context. GENERAL THEORY OF COMMODITY AGREEMENTS The upsurge in demands for commodity agreements seen in the last decade or so stems largely from agitation by the less developed countries (LDC) for better economic treatment by more developed countries (MDC). Several economic factors, real or imagined, adversely affect the LDC's as follows (MacAvoy, 1977): 1) variable demand in MDC's causes wide fluctuations in commodity prices which hurt the economies of commodity producers, who are often LDC's although consumer economies may also benefit from more predictable prices; 2) a general decline of commodity prices relative to the price of manufactured goods which hurts commodity producers in their balance of trade while their stocks and overcapacity rise; 3) instability of LDC economies enhanced by the above factors lowers internal stability, inhibits foreign investment, and retards economic growth; and 4) a lack of self respect when dealing with developed countries o, following the OPEC lead, LDC producers want the stature related to cartel market power.

Jan 1, 1985

By D. G. Keefe, I. C. Robinson

In this paper the authors present their views on the actual and potential role of commodity analysis in mining industry. Owing to the dominant influence of the economy on all commodity markets, it is essential that individual commodities are studied not only in depth but within the broader context of economic influences. A commodity unit, which monitors market developments in a wide range of commodities, is well placed to provide the broader perspective in the study of commodity markets. This paper describes some of the specific functions of such a unit. Some of the methods used for price forecasting are described, and the results of price forecasts by different forecasting methods are compared.

Jan 1, 1980

By F. H. Buttner

Commodity currency intrigues most of us because of the problems it offers to solve for the Third and the First Worlds. What problems might be solved, if commodity currency were to be adopted in the Third World? That is really the question we are probing here right now. It would take a while to think through all their subtle consequences of this question, but, off the top, it might well have at least three important impacts. Most important of these to this audience is relief from unfair Third World competition. Second, it might well liberate Third World economies from financial indebtedness to the First World and give them freedom from the liquidity limitations. The third benefit is that it might help relieve World trade tensions. All three benefits are interrelated. We could start our speculations on the application of commodity currency from anyone of these starting points. But let us use the starting point most important to you, unfair competition to the U.S. mining industry. From there we might wind up with some thoughts on things you, yourselves, can do to improve things.

Jan 1, 1978

1. Domestic Production and Use: Twelve companies operated 31 primary aluminum reduction plants, three firms accounting for 66% of production. Washington, Oregon, and Montana accounted for 32% of the total production; Gulf Coast States, 25%; Northern States, 29%; and other Southern States, 14%. Output of primary metal in 1973 was valued at $2.2 billion. About 80% of the secondary recovery was from new aluminum base scrap and 20% was from old scrap. Aluminum consumption by 25,000 firms was centered in the East Central United States. Of aluminum consuming industries in 1972, building accounted for 28%; transportation 19%; electrical, 13%; packaging, 16%; and consumer durab1es, 10%.

Jan 1, 1974

1. Domestic Production and Use: In 1974 twelve companies operated 31 primary aluminum reduction plants, three firms accounting for 64% of production. Washington, Oregon, and Montana accounted for 32% of the total production; Gulf Coast States, 24%; Northern States, 33%, and other Southern States 11%. Output of primary metal in 1974 was valued at $3.4 billion. About 80% of the secondary recovery was from new aluminum base scrap and 20% was from old scrap. Aluminum consumption by 25,000 firms was centered in the East Central United States. Of aluminum consuming industries in 1974, building accounted for about 27%; transportation 19%; electrical, 13%; packaging, 15%; and consumer durab1es, 9%.

Jan 1, 1975

1. Domestic Production and Use: In 1975.12 companies operated 31 primary aluminum reduction plants, with 3 firms accounting for 67% of production capacity. Washington, Oregon, and Montana accounted for 37% of the total production; Gulf Coast States 21%, Northern States 29%, and other Southern States 13%. Output of primary metal in 1975 was valued at $3.0 billion. Aluminum consumption by 25,000 firms was centered in the East Central United States. Of aluminum consuming industries in 1975, building accounted for about 21%; transportation 19%; electrical 14%; packaging 18%; and consumer durables, 9%.

Jan 1, 1976