THE WALLSEND COAL MINE.

Greymouth Evening Star, Volume XXXI, 27 March 1901, Page 4

THE WALLSEND COAL MINE.

(To tha Editor.)

Sir, —There is very little good in Mr Matheson and I disputing over the quality of Wallsend coal and making comparison, as there is no Wallsend coal unless there be a lump in some museum, say, Wellington or Christchurch. Chemical analysis alone would decide the matter, and if there be no coal out of the mine it is useless to argue further. Now there is no Wallsend coal, and there has been none since 1890, eleven years ago : and there will soon be no Brunner coal for both supplies will soon be old memories. Are we to sit still because a company tried to work Wallsend 20 years ago and failed. Is Mr Matheson certain that either the lirst failure or the last was due to the quality of the coal? Might not bad management or a limited market have something to do with both stoppages ? As you point out in your leader of Saturday the market at the time of the first venture tvas limited. Nothing at all like what it is tc-lay. Another thing it may surprise Mr Matheson that the cargo of the Pukaki, said to bo sold for 7s 6d per ton, was from Coalpit Heath and not from Wallsend as alleged. Even Coalpit Heath had stone in it. Don’t bo surprised, there are men in the district who allege the cargo of ths Pukaki was from Coalpit Heath. I regret the strike as much as Mr Matheson. It was worse than a crime, it was a huge blunder, and I fear we have not seen all its evil effects yet. Still the failure of the first and second venture, and the strike duasterous as it proved, is no reason why we are not to exert ourselves to-day. There is no hope for the district but to go ahead. There is no good in crying over spilled mhk —Mr Mathesm says “There is no member of the Board who has been more earnest in supporting prospecting for coal by the Board than I have been and will continue to do so in every legitimate way that I think the publics money should bo expended.” I want to know where the Harbor Board has prospected ? What has the Board done to test its property?. A large sum was given to the present company to put a road to Coolgardie as it is called (the 20 aero block), another largo sura was given to make a road to the Brunner dip, another sum was given to put down a bore hole in flic brick yard. Besides some three thousand and rents and royalties outstanding, all this money was trilled away and no coal available. The outlook never was so bad as to-day. I assert the Harbor Board are trilling with the interests of the colony. They are playing into the hands of the coal monoply. Here is how the matter stands. The law allows the Board to expend half its revenue in prospecting, yet witli plont yof funds available. Not a penny lias ever been spent only on the present Co.’ property. Instead of prospecting the field by boring as was resolved several weeks ago, they go whining to the Premier for a subsidy.

I will deal with the cause of the Wall send failure in another issue.—l am, An Old Miner. Brunner, 27th March.