THE SEW HOY BIG BEACH GOLD MINING COMPANY. TO THE EDITOR.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 8595, 10 September 1889, Page 2

THE SEW HOY BIG BEACH GOLD MINING COMPANY. TO THE EDITOR.

' Sib, —I cannot permit you to bring as you do a new element into the field such as that in your note to my letter appearing in your Saturday's , issue. Your leading article of the sth inst. charged.this company with being " hungry pro- _ moters" and " a case of heads 1 win tails you ' lose," and seeking to " discount the profits for several years " by a " large present payment;" and waruiDg the public to avoid it. Now, a J journal that truly desires to guide the public should have made itself aware of the grounds for assertion so strongly made; aud not seek to , direct your attack into a side issue b7 your further remarks. Did you' think what these , remarks really mean? Do you accuse the direbtors of the Shotover Big Beach Gold Mining Company (Limited) of paying its dividends , out nf capital? You acknowledge that there a was broken time, breakages, ko. In addition I you must know that large expenses must ; have been incurred since the Shotover Comt pany began busimss in preliminary expenses, wages, &c. before any result could be obtained, . and yet you ask where has the balance of £2000 gone to. Is this asked ironically? Am I to r make up a balance sheet for your special benefit ,to enable you to retract ? Does it not strike you Jas something very remarkable in Otago gold mining that the Shotover Big Beach Company should have, so soon after getting into working order, been able to pay dividends to the amount it has ? The Frankton Beach Dredging Com- ; pany you laud, and you recommend people to ' invest in its shares; that the weekly revenue would be £562 and expenditure £60, leaving a | profit of £502; aud this estimate you know to be ' problematical, and from the experience of the Shotover Big Beach, ridiculously high. No t dredge has yet been put there, and whether it { will yield a tenth of the amount no one knows, j The product of 3950z retorted gold from the j Shotover Big Beach is for eight weeks from one dredge, and yet in your criticisms you deliberately banish from your mind the fact that four j additional dredges, more powerful and better j able to get gold from deoper parts of tho claim,' are to be built, and there is no reason to doubt the statement that £60,0 to £70,000 of gold will be produced per annum. It is quite apparent that the working expanses of five drc jges would be cheaper iv proportion than one Where, then, is the enormous over-estimation of revenue ? The Franktou Beach Dredging Company say there will be a weekly profit of £502. I This shows a profit with one dredge of £26,104, ! and you find fault with the Big Beach Company estimating £60,C00 with five dredges. Did you not observe that all the dredging companies in the Shotover district put in the market have I quoted the Big Beach claim as an inducement for all to invest ? Were these companies purporting a swindle ? Has not the unprecedented success of the Big Beach been the means of floating these companies successfully ? I am, &c, Thomas Cahendee, Interim Secretary the Sew Hoy Big Beach Gold Mining Company Dunedin, September 9. [Mr Callender entirely misrepresents what we said when he says that we lauded the Frankton Beach Dredging Company and recommended people to invest in its shares; aud further implies that we agreed with the statement made iv the prospectus- of that company that the weekly revenue would be £562 and expenditure 462, leaving a profit of £502. We neither lauded the Frankton Beach Company, recommended investment in its shares, nor agreed with the report of their engineer as to its probable profits. What we did was simply to institute a comparison between the enormous value placed by the Sew Hoy Company's directors and the comparatively moderate sum asked by the Frankton Beach Company for their property. We further asked whether it would not be better to " divide £1000 between half a dozen such companies as this than to put it all into the Sew Hoy Company's concern, twothirds of it being immediately swept into the pockets of the lucky promoters?" We regret that neither Mr Callender nor the provisional directors of his company have thought it worth while to answer straightforwardly our request for further information as to their net profits We as yet see no reason to alter the opinion we liave formed that the company as placed on the market is enormously overloaded, and we are quite certain that nine-tonths of the business portion of the community are of our opinion — Ed. O. D. T.] ■ » '■ TO THE EDITOR. Sir,—l thank you heartily for writing your leader of tho sth re the Sew Hoy Company. iTou have saved me a few pounds, and a great many others as well, for which I am sure you will have earned the thanks of thousands. a sioce reading jour article I think money spent JU consultations would be a safer investment. 41 Lam told Sew Hoy could take all the sharc3 a nmself and not miss the money. The modus ''' >perandi would be, I dare say, like some other ol companies, starve the small shareholders out, pc nd a few lucky promoters rake the money iv tl nd laugh in their sleeves that there are so cs nany flats about, not thinking of the harm be one by fleecing an easily gulled public. lam tri fraia we are going to have a gold mining boom n.—l am, &c, September 8. A Thankful Outsider. to an ■ • as TO THE EDITOR, tra Sir, —Mr James Gore wishes to assure you lat eveu if the company (Sew Hoy Big Beach) ' )es not float, other means will be. taken to raise bol le necessary capital (about £16,000). Surely, re S ir, if £16,000 will suffice for such a good thing, ™y hy solicit the public to invest in 80,000 shares 's n £2 each, unless more be expected to be ob- Tf& iiied from the shareholders than from tho riv< iim ? I can't " savee."—l am, &c, not Dunedin, September 9. Ancient Miner. tha ope : • j Nu> TO TUE EDITOR. i j n gi Sin, —With reference to your statement that i and "res in the Sbotover Big Beach Company have day en purchased at large prices in the hope of offic iti'ig £340oach in the company proposed to dor formed, I bog to say that I am a purchaser torn !bo liigh priced sh<ufes lately sold; tbat I nam nglit; thesis share? after inquiring from a com- who U:iii iniilmrity tin tlio spot., wbo is thoroughly ' fiudi )iiaiiite;l with the working aud prospects; of j ■ .Big Beach ulniui. His advi.e was distinctly \ M (•in ell'ect that he would ntl-hergivu over £100 ' rcu.i >h ior one share; iv the Shotover Big Bench j has Dipany than invest in shares in auy of the j busil er companies offering. This recommeoda- ' janit

tion is backed up by facts within the knowledge iof my oorrespnndenf, who clearly knew of what |he was writing. On Ms advice I acted, and lam | not inclined to accept less for my property than I I have agreed to at a general meeting of the company. Let me add that if any investor wishes to make use of the information I have received be will be welcome to it if he gives me a call.—l am, &c, R. T. Wheeleb, Jun. Dunedin, September 9.

TO THE EDITOB. Sir, —Referrine to my letter to you of the 4th instant, relative to tho prospectus of the Sew Hoy Big Beach Gold Mining Company,' Limited, may I venture to crave space for the purpose of intimating to your readers that I have no interest of any kind either direct or indirect in any gold mining claim in New Zealand or elsewhere, and to add that my sole idea in writing to you was to place the prospectus before the public in the light it appeared to me after due consideration thereof.—l am, &c, Dunedin, September 9. ' Confucius. [Our article was written before Confucius' letter reached us.—Ed. O. D. T]