The Cromwell Wold Dredging: Company.

Otago Witness, Issue 2326, 29 September 1898, Page 16

The Cromwell Wold Dredging: Company.

TO THE EDITOB. Sir, — Evidently my letter of the 10th. iust. ; has caused much unrest to Messrs Quick and Smith, Sievwriglit, and Hay ward. I had no intention of writing further on this matter, ! but as the letters appearing in your issue of tlie 12th from the above-named gentlemen court a reply, I would by your courtesy say a few words. In the first place Messrs Quick and Smith and Siovwright say I have an obvious object in writing mine of the 10th. Quite bo ; and it is, I venture to say, a worthy object, and the public will no doubt appreciate it. I am further pleased to see that it has been plainly pointed out that the marking of the plan with Electric No. 1 and 2 must not be read as referring to the No. 1 and 2 dredges. Now, if the plan had been plainly marked Nob. 1, 2, and 3 (claims) this correspondence may not Lave taken up your valuable space, but now the promoters and Mr Hayward may number them as they choose, as the position will now be clearly understood by tho public. Now with regard to results from this No. 1 dredge when working on what they now term No. 1 claim. She may have got oven lOOOoz, but I fail to see how that ought to appreciate the Cromwell Company's claim, as anyone who has any experience in dredging ' knows only too well that the bed of a river : is not one continuous band of gold. Both Messrs Quick and Smith and Sievwright and Hayward comment upon the efficiency of the prospecting done by the Electric Company. Well, I will just say that it -was sufficiently prospected both in the middle of the river and at the sides to warrant the company giving it up. They may have done wrong ; the buckets may have been within a foot of untold wealth. Who can say? Exception is taken to my remarks re the position of the ground prospected by Mr Crookston, and it is inferred that my reasons for making these remarks are doubtful. Sir, I will ask you to refer to my letter, and I am sure you would admit that I plainly state where this ground .is situated, tmt as Mr Crookston, in his report published in the prospectus, says : "I cannot see how the claim will not turn out good results, being situated between the two [I presume that he meant No 3. 1 and 2 claims, as the promoters term them], and nothing, so far as I can see, to break the run of gold.'' I wish to point out, by mentioning Mr Crookston' s failure to get gold between the No. 1 and 2 dredges, that this was an object les3on in the vagaries of gold leads, against his supposition that the lead of gold was continuous through the Cromwell claim, as by his own work he showed there was no gold between the two dredges working above aiM below his own ground. And I should say there are more evidences that a lead went through his ground than there is evidence that a lead goes through the Cromwell ground. Sir, gold-getting is a glorious uncertainty, and the public should know it, and be cautious. lam not speaking for people who are well-to-do and may not miss a few pounds ; and, Sir, I say it in wrong tliat claims should be blazoned throughout the country on the strength of returns that are got miles away. Gold is not to be found anywhere and everywhere in payable quantities, and I could name to you seven dredges now that have been unsuccessful in finding payable gold during the last 12 months. It is not such letters as mine that will do the industry harm, fait should have the effect of making investors investigate for themselves. and if possible I would advise them to go to tho scone of the proposed operations. This is the true way to invest, as one failure docs more harm to the industry than many successes can achieve for it. Messrs Quick and Smith and Sievwright desire me to publish my name. I really don't see what good end this 'would serve, other than to help the Benevolent Institution, but I' must beg to be excused, even if it is at the expense of that worthy institution. As to results by change of management, I have nothing to say, nor should I imagine Mr Hayward can know the reasons of the company for this step ; but I have it on good authority that the gentleman who directed operations while prospecting the Cromwell claim remained on No. 1 dredge after she was removed, and practically directed operations when that dredge got gold on the top end of the upper claim. As to Mr Hayward' s statement " that tho Cromwell Company's ground was jumped when held by the Electric Company," this is purely a myth, as the ground was voluntarily abandoned after prospecting. This statement shows how unreliable Mr Hay-ward's memory must be. The litigation in which the Electric Company was involved was (as I find on taking up the newspapers) with reference to their claims lower down the river, and I find that in all the litigation to which, they were subjected they won. So much for Mr Hayward ; and as I have said before the fact remains that the Electric Company did not get gold on , the Cromwell Company's claim. — I am, etc., Dunedin, Sept. 12. One Who Knows. [The above letter has been held over in order to admit of simultaneous publication of other correspondence on the subject which had to be obtained from the country. This : correspondence not having been handed to us by the secretary, probably through nonreceipt, we publish the letter of " One Who Knows," and will afford the Cromwell Company space for reply when the information they are expecting is to hand. In connection withthis subject, -we apnend an article by a , special representative of this journal who has visited the Kawarau to furnish us -with an independent report on the subject. — Ed. O.D.T.]