This statement reveals a source of error in estimating the relative values of the Watt and the Trevithick engine; that of the latter was the Welsh locomotive, compared in duty with the large Watt pumping engine, pointed out in Trevithick's letter[110] of that time, as an unfair comparison; the small high-pressure puffer, in 1804, is admitted to have done seventeen and a half millions of duty with a bushel of coal of 84 lbs., while in Rees' calculation of the engines, he gives Watt 94 lbs. of coal to a bushel; and having stated that the Watt pumping engines in Cornwall, in 1811, averaged but thirteen and a half millions of duty, draws the false conclusion that the high-pressure cannot compete with the low-pressure where coals are dear; yet he agrees with other writers that the great increase in the duty of the Cornish pumping engines commenced from 1811 (when Trevithick first gave them his high-pressure steam); and states that in 1816 the Stray Park 63-inch cylinder single-acting engine,[111] being one of three then working in Dolcoath, did thirty-one millions. [Footnote 110: See vol. i., p. 166.] [Footnote 111: See Watt's statement, vol. ii., p. 115.] The 'Encyclopædia Britannica' on the question of duty states:[112]-- [Footnote 112: See "Steam-Engine," published 1860.] "The duty of the best of Smeaton's engines was, in 1772, 9,450,000 foot pounds per cwt. of coal. On the expiration of Watt's patent, about the year 1800, the highest duty of his engines amounted to twenty millions, or more than double the former duty, which may represent the economical value of the improvement effected by Watt under his various patents. "The reported duty of Cornish pumping engines, by the consumption of 94 lbs. of coals, rose from an average of nineteen millions and a half, and a maximum of twenty-six millions in 1813, to an average of sixty millions and a maximum of ninety-six millions in 1843. It is necessary to bear in mind the distinction between the duty of a bushel of coal and 112 lbs." Here, also, are the same general facts as to the duty of the Watt engine, and the marked and rapid increase of duty dating from Trevithick's Dolcoath engines in 1811; but the confusion and even contradictions in the statements prove how little the subject was understood. "A rough draft, prepared by Mr. Edmonds on Trevithick's return from America, dated 1828, for an application to Parliament for remuneration to Trevithick, says, 'That this kingdom is indebted to your petitioner for some of the most important improvements that have been made in the steam-engine.