But the claims of spartina had been promptly investigated--to be found wanting. In the first place, when a new material appears to be promising the question as to whether sufficiently imposing supplies could be forthcoming must be considered carefully. The paper-making machines are insatiable and avaricious, devouring raw material not by the ton but by the thousands of tons. This in turn gives rise to the question as to the cost of securing the necessarily heavy supplies. One enthusiast, who had advanced the claims of the couch grass, was interrogated upon the subject because he had evolved a means of gathering the spartina. When he was asked the cost of his process he blandly replied that he could do it for £15--$75--per ton. He received a shock when he was told that there was another material, forthcoming in far greater quantities, and far more suitable for the purpose, which could be obtained and delivered to the mill for £4 10s.--$22.50--a ton! I may remark that spartina grass is being used for paper-making where the conditions favour its cheap collection and transport. Speaking generally, however, with prices at an artificial level, any material costing more than £5--$25--per ton delivered at the mill--this figure is inclusive of collecting, transport, and other charges--stands little chance of favourable consideration. Under normal trading conditions the prospect will be even less attractive. The acquisition of the raw material represents merely the preliminary phase of the whole issue. To reduce it to pulp involves the consumption of coal--cheap water-power is rare in these islands--and so the probable fuel bill requires to be sounded. How many tons of coal will be required to produce a ton of pulp? It is a simple question and one which prompts another, closely allied thereto, namely, “How many tons of such-and-such material will be required to furnish a ton of paper?” This is the rock upon which many buoyant expectations have been completely wrecked. Still confining ourselves to the couch grass, and considering the second factor first, we find that it has rather a low yield efficiency, this being in the neighbourhood of 27 per cent. In other words, it will require nearly four tons of crude grass to produce one ton of paper. When ranged beside esparto grass, with which it seems to have much in common, and which therefore is a convenient comparative unit, the outlook for the couch grass is completely shattered, because the efficiency yield of esparto is high, 43·5 per cent. Only a little more than two tons of grass are necessary to produce one ton of paper.