OPEN COLUMN

Inangahua Times, Volume XI, Issue 1905, 5 September 1887, Page 2

OPEN COLUMN

(Jur columns are open to the discussion of all matters of public interest, but we are in no way identified with the views of our correspondents. THE RED HILL COMPANY. (To the Editor, Inanqahua Times). Six. — In your issue of August 22nd you publish from the " Mining Journal " a report of a meeting of the N.Z. Reel Hill Company, in London. To attempt to separate the very small amount of truth from such a tissue of falsehood would take too much space, but I will ask you to Jet me say a few words about it, as my name has been mentioned! with that absence of truth, so characteristic of this company. In the 6rst place I will take two paragraphs from the prospectus of the above company. "The following is an extract from Mr Russell's report, dated October, 1885. Before estimating the outlay on works, however, I shall proceed with this report in respect to the capabilities of the mine for yielding gold-bearing quartz, taking as my basis the area of ground I pr-.ived, but which, in my opinion, is not 5 per cent nf.ibe total likely to be worked. Length of reef proved . . . . 600 feet Depth 90 feet Average thickness of quartz . . 6 inches Number of reefs . . . . . . 5 600 ft x 90ft x6 x 5 5000 cub yds quartz or 9500 tons of quartz tons quartz oz per ton value of gold 9500 6 9-10 at £3 17s I. Proved value present workings .. £252,367 10s . "The tunnel which is now being pressed on with, will, cut these seefs 230 feet lower than the present workings, and from which I estimate 33,250 tons of goldbearing quartz will be mined, which will give 229,4250z3 of "old, or in value £883, 286. The above startling statement is given by Mr — or, as the prospectus has it, "James Russell, Esquire, a mining engineer of great experience, well known both at Home and in the Colonies. " I was asked by Messrs Fell and Atkinson if those statements were correct, and I, of course, told them that they were quite false, as they had not proved even one reef or leader to exist on the pro- j perty, but that the ground might be , worth prospecting. A Mr Price- Williams, visited the property, and, I presume, had his spectacles properly focussed, as in a very short time he could see all that ho was wanted to see, (although what he said he saw did not exist),- and not only corroborated the lively imaginings of Mr Russell, but even went further, and, I suppose, on the principle that it is as well to be hung for a sheep as a lamb, says Mr Russe'l did not draw the long bow long enough. This man, who appears in the transactions of this company as another " well-know engineer," makes a report on this mine, advising those who may be flats tnough to believe him, to pay £100,000 for this property. As he leads them to believe that he is an expert in gold mining it shows him to be a novice in the matter. The attempt to take in English capitalists with this Red Hill mine will do a great injury to legitimate mining,.and it should be carefully looked into and exposed To show that although I may not be an expert, I am not afraid of such experts as the two "well-known" engineers, I will ask you to have published a copy nf a letter of mine which appoared in the Nelson Evening Mail, August 27th. I may add that lam not "an elderly gentleman," and that Mr Price-Williams did not meet in New Zealand. This, perhaps, is the only uninteutional mistatement in his report. I. have, &c., H. P. Washbourne. Nelson, August 30th, 1887.

Mr Russell states in the Prospectus that there- are five, reefs GOOft lung. -'6oft deep, and averaging 6 inches th ; ck, pr-»ved in this mine, which will give 9500 tons of quartz, yielding 6.>zs and 9.loth* of aold per ton ; "proved value of present workings £252,367 10s," Js T ow those are the ' 'statements that have been C;mtnvl' : c^d, and which form the " gratuitous sln»i'l.«iV spoken of If they hare proved 6500 tons of quartz with nfturfy 7^m of gold' per ton of the value of L 252,367 10a, why do they not have thn question set at rest hy having the matter thoroughly investigated, and pnt to shiine those who have denied it and said it va» false. T say they dare not, for they know it will not. bear investigation^ Under oorer of annoymoiiß writers tTrey nmy try aittt mislead the public by ev.t<Ti«g tt*» point at is3ue which is, Are tire statements unde in the prospectus of this company true, or are they false ? I have publicly staled that they are false, and they have nothad the courage to take action in thematter to pro\'e that I am unreliable. Either they have lied most abominably or I have. Which } 8 it ? I challenge thetir to have the matter openJy investigated and show which it is. Your peripatetic contributor would bfv wise iv future not to make charges of slander on such very unreliable data unless he is prepared to give his name and substantiate them, which ii* this vase he cannot dr>. I have tfec., H. P. WASmSOUBNB. Nelson, August 27th v 1887".