ALEXANDER MINES.

Grey River Argus, 14 February 1929, Page 5

ALEXANDER MINES.

Meeting of Shareholders.

A meeting of shareholders of Alexunder Mines Ltd. was held at Mr Fogarty’s office (Greymouth) last evening. About forty persons were present, including the four directors Messrs Sidney (chairman), D. MeVicar, J. B. Auld, and J. McKay, and the Company’s Secretary, Mr J. H. Lee. i Mr T. Sullivan, convenor of the meeting, explained that the meeting had been called to discuss certain questions in connection with the development of the mine. He wished to point out that Mr Fry had nothing to do with calling the meeting, but he had consented to come along. Mr F. A. Kitchingham was elected to the chair.

Mr W. S. Clark (Cobden) moved that the press be excluded from the meeting. Mr Su'divan moved as an amendment that the pres? be admitted. A show of hands disclosed that 19 favoured the amendment and 14 were against it. Mr Sullivan said he would like to ask a few questions in regard to the cyanide plant; why there had been fluctuations in the returns; and what was the cost of it. Mr Fry, in the course of his reply, raid that it was well-known that he was not pleased with the returns. As the third largest shareholder he took considerable interest in the mine. He had opposed the cyanide plant from the outset, and claimed that results had justified his opposition to it. They had only got £1 a ton from September 1926 until September 1928, allowing for little stops in April* May, and June, when the directors considered the cost was too much. They would never reach MeVicar’s figures, and were sending away valuable residues. He considered his opposition to the cyanide plant was justified until they had' a proper method of saving all the gold. The plant wouldn’t pay for itself. A total of 907 tons from the MeVicar .’dam had only yielded £305. They had splendid reserves for cyaniding, but it wouldn’t pay. The plant had cost them a total of £l5OO to build and run for two years, and they had won £l3OO from it. They had lost at least £2OO. He had told the shareholders at the time that it would have to be scrapped, and that had been done except for a few pipes of no particular value.

In reply to the Chairman, Mr Fry stated that the £l5OO mentioned 'lid not include the manager’s salary. Mr D. MeVicar (to Mr Fry): Did yon not recommend the cyanide plant as a payable proposition? Mr Fry replied that he did not consent to the cyanide plant. The 90 days (to register) were nearly up, aud he was in their hands. He had never considered it as a practical scheme at all. Cyaniding was necessary, but they shouldn’t have put a plant in there. Everyone at the Reef ton meeting would remember that he was opposed to .it. The speaker gave a detailed explanation of the working of the plant. He had told the shareholders that he was quite content with amalgamation, but he would never depart from that. Mr Lee (Secretary) quoted from the Company’s reports showing that the actual cost of the cyanide plant was £734 2/9, running expenses £632. A total of 907 tons had been treated, and £1,386 won, leaving a profit of £754.

A lengthy argument ensued between Messrs Auld, Fry, and Mann, concerning the cost of working the plant, and the number of men required there. The Chairman intervened, and at his request the Secretary explained th* 1 position in regard to the manager, stating that the charge of 25 per cent, allowed on the cyanide plant was quite fair and regular. Mr Fry claimed that they had had better results since Mr Hogg had left, and the Company had looked after amalgamation. Mr MeVicar* You’re trying to make out that we are running two shifts. Mr Auld pointed out that they couldn’t tell what the exact return was till the battery was cleaned up. Mr Fry explained the various processes at length, and said that he undertook that Mr Hogg had cleaned up all the zincs, and there was practically no gold in suspension.

A shareholder: Are we at a school of mines, or what? Mr Auld said that after hearing Mr Fry, he wished to apologise for suggesting that a lot of gold was left in suspension. Apparently it went over the hill. Mr Auld said he would like to ask how long it took to build Ihe plant? Mr Mann was endeavouring to reply when Mr MeVicar interjected: You took so d long to build it, we had to close down. Mr Mann: I don’t know so much about that. Mr Sullivan complained that reports regarding the McKay reef .did not give the shareholders all the information that was available to others. The reports were very meagre, and he would like to know why the shareholders had not been given more information concerning the assays and backs of the McKay reef. Mr Lee stated, in reply that the reports as issued by the mine manager were available to all shareholders and the press. He had followed the same procedure for the last 25 years. Mr Sullivan: We never got an assay value of the McKay reef or the amount of backs for January. Mr Lee claimed that shareholders could get all the information 'they desired from the monthly reports. Mr Fry quoted from reports, and admitted that there was no mention of assays in them. Mr MeVicar complained that he often got the reports from the paper before they came from the Secretary. Mr Lee explained that the reports were forwarded as soon as they were available, but if they missed the mail it meant a delay of a day or two.

A shareholder stated that he haa seen an assay valuation in the Christchurch Press which was not in the (Jompany’s report. Mr Lee reiterated that exactly the same information from she mine manager was given to the shareholders. A shareholder: Probably it’s \tho mine manager’s fault. Mr SulLvan wished to know why Mr Mann had resigned, and if anyone had been appointed to his place. Mr Fry said that his resignation had been accepted under protest. The position had not yet been filled. Mr Boucher said he would like to know why Mr Mann resigned. Mr Auld explained how Mr Mann had declined to comply with instructions given by the directors for the installation of a concentrating plant, and the duplication of the pipe line at the sawmill. Mr Lee, at the request of shareholders. read Mr Mann’s reply to the directors the matter; in the course of which he stated that he thought the directors had been misinformed regarding the need for and the duplication of the pipe line. As the sawmill was giving every satisfaction, and they were also ill-advised regarding the concentrating plant. He declined to put them in because it was contrary to the dictates of his judgment, and not in the interests of the shareholders, and as they had not thought it worth while to ask his opinion about it, he wished to resign. A lengthy argument enused bet wee i Messrs Mann. Auld and McKay, concerning the respective merits of Wilfley tables and blanketing. Mr McKay mentioned that the company had bought two Wilfley tables second-hand for £7O apiece, which would cost about £l4O if new.

Mr Mann said that he was a shareholder, and if he considered the directors were quite wrong, he was justified in acting as he had done. They had a good mine, but since the present directors took over, what good had they got out of it? Mr Boucher contended that if four out of the five directors instructed Mr Mann to carry out the work, he should have done it. In reply to a question, Mr MeVicar said it was hard to say how long they v. ould be before crushing was started. He understood Jiat the stampers would be in by November, but they were not in yet. Mr Lee intimated that the rope was on the Port Bowen. AU the tressels were finished, and they only had to erect the buckets. The pipes for driv- * ing the battery were at Ikamatua. Mr Shannon wished to know whether contributing sharohold’ers ed 13/20ths or 20-20ths. The Secretary replied that they received 13-20ths. Mr Shannon expressed the opinion that they had been mislead by the prospects and that it was “one of the rottenest things in mining.” It was the contributing shareholders that built up the company. If the company was successful, they got 13-20ths, but if it failed they had to pay 20/- in the £l. Mr McKay said it was up to the man buying shares to read the articles of association before he did so.

Mr Shannon: If the company produces at 13/-, will contributing shareholders be allowed to put in the other 7/- and get 20-20ths? Mr Fry: Yes. Messrs Fry and Lee briefly .explained the position in regard to oontributing shareholders, but Mr Shan non still maintained that it had not been made clear in the prospectus. Mr Kitchingham expressed the opinion that the prospectus set out everything, and was in accordance with the Mining Act, and nobody could have been misled. Mr Fry said he would like to ask his fellow directors why £4OO had been spent on the No. 4 drive. Mr McKay said he was thoroughly satisfied that they were ou the track of the lode; and Mr Auld considered that they had adopted the best policy at that time. The same thing had been done at the Wealth of Nations Mine, and at the “Keep it Dark.” He quoted from a report in which Mr Fry had advocated driving. Mr McKay said that personally he was satisfied that they would find the reef if they looked far enough for it. Mr Fry contended that they had not had sufficient data to work on, and that other work would have proved more profitable. They should have followed his advice of three years agOj when they had found valuable stone. It was resolved on the motion of Messrs Sullivan and Boucher that Um Company be requested to issue a report stating the amount of ores available for crushing. Mr Lee mentioned that the last official estimate showed that there wan £44,000 of gold in sight. Eurther argument took plaee between Mr Fry and other directors concerning the policy of the Company. Mr MeVicar offered to give £lO to the Hospital if Mr Fry could show on the minutes of any recent meeting of the Board where he had made any suggestions. Mr Fry said that he had onlv misseg one meeting. He contended that m . fair tactics had been employed against him. Mr MeVicar (heatedly): “I hope you don't think I had anything to d« with that swindle? The Chairman intervened, remarking that mutual recriminations were no good. In reply to Mr Clark, Mr MeVicar said that he thought they (McViear Bros.) would have been crashing all the time if they had run the mine themselves. On the motion of Messrs Boueher and Hambleton, a vote of eonfldenee m the directors was carried It was agreed on the motion of Mr Hambleton that it be recommended that the next annual meeting be held in Greymouth. The meeting concluded with a vote of thanks to the chair.