The Evening Star WEDNESDAY, MAY 31, 1871.

Evening Star, Volume IX, Issue 2585, 31 May 1871, Page 2

The Evening Star WEDNESDAY, MAY 31, 1871.

The Mining Conference have finished their labors and reported to his Honor. We have not had time to read that report carefully, so that we cannot give any opinion as to the recommendations as a whole. From what may be termed the preamble, however, we should judge that the measures suggested will require very careful consideration by the Legislature before they are adopted as the bases of law. There can be no doubt whatever that the Commissioners truly Bay “ the existing _ law is “ unsatisfactory and conflicting in “ many respects,” and interwoven with .matters not strictly connected with purely mining legislation. This was known before the Commission was appointed, and it was in consequence of this knowledge that its labors became necessary. But these complications naturally arise when one industry connected with produce from the land clashes with, or is pursued in the midst of other occupations. There can be no question of the vast importance of gold-raining to the Province and to the Colony ; and, admitting this, every one will be prepared to give the utmost encouragement to it, consistently with justice to others. But it is exactly this point that, it appears to us, some of the recommendations of the Commission lose sight of. Passing by the recommendation to allow miners the right to enter and mine upon private property —a right claimed in Victoria, and conceded under certain equitable conditions to the owners of , the soil, we cannot help noticing that certain regulations are put forward as grievances, w'hich, in some form or other should be looked upon as protections to mining privileges. If it be true that the privilege of mining is that of liberty to follow an industry admitted to bo most profitable, why should miners be allowed privileges if they neglect to take out a miner’s right 1 The Commissioners complain of this trifling payment for permission to mine as a grievous hardship, and go so far as to say that that hardship is intensified, because, if a miner neglects to take out a miner’s right, he is unable to defend his rights. We confess to having little sympathy with this view of the matter. When the miner’s right is spoken of as a source of revenue, we think the question is not placed in a fair and reasonable light. The Commissioners do not go so far as to say that it should be abolished, but that neglect by a miner to provide himself with one should not involve forfeiture of property in the mine. We cannot see anything vexatious in requiring that every miner should pay for the privilege of mining. It is only the smallest possible rent for the use of very valuaable land, and does not nearly reimburse the country, of itself, for the injury done to the surface. And moreover, when it is considered that miners require protection to life and property in common with other inhabitants of the Province, and that as far as possible roads must be constructed to facilitate intercommunication, the payment is but a mere trifle compared with that paid by other men for exclusive privileges. The question of loss of property through neglect to procure so simple an instrument, is open to consideration; but we are much inclined to think that it is unwise to give a premium upon loose habits of business. Give but the opportunity of speculating upon the chances of profit and loss through negleet, and neglect would rapidly degenerate into design. The plea of neglect is not admitted in any other industry. A man must not cut wood nor flax, nor quarry nor mine for coal, without a license—most commonly very much higher in proportion to the probable profit than the cost of a miner’s right. If he do these things he is liable to fine, and to be superseded by some person who has armed himself with authority. We do not see why an exception should be made in favor of a miner who has additional privileges, electoral and otherwise, connected with possession of his miner’s right above what are conferred by the licenses alluded to. The Commissioners recommend next that a miner’s right should be made available for the occupation of Crown Lands throughout the Colony. This is really a difficulty under which Now Zealand labors, when compared with Victoria and New South Wales, and it is one that will prove hard to deal with. It arises from our mode of colonisation and Government by Provinces instead of from one centre. Miners’ rights being land revenue, the complications arising from these imperii in imperio would render it difficult to determine to which Province it should belong. As wining

progresses towards becoming a settled industry, this difficulty will be lessened; but at present there is continual movement amongst miners as a class, and the Government of Auckland would feel very wroth at a man settling himself down on a claim there, by authority of a miner’s right issued in Otago some months before, by virtue of which he had occupied a profitable claim here and worked it out. We shall pursue this subject further.