WEST COAST DREDGING.

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

WEST COAST DREDGING.

{To the Editor.)

g IE _Of late much has been written and more spoken, in regard to the dredging industry, so that it is with the greatest reluctance I venture to point out a few facts which investors persist ignoring. Company after company has been floated and their claims provided with inefficient machines.

The engineers, no doubt, blame their failures to the scanty prospecting to which the directors have, as a rule, submitted their claims. But then one naturally wonders how an engineer can design a dredge unless he knows the work expected from it, and the only conclusion to be arrived at, is that the dredge has been designed in complete ignorance of its requirements. That most of the claims on the Coast contain highly payable wash, has been demonstrated beyond the shadow of a doubt.

As a keen dredging investor, I have time and again marvelled at the list of our failures—a list, by the way, which is added to weekly. By considering each dredge separately the shock is greatly lessened, as apparently reasonable excuses are put forward for their lack of success. But when a list is made out, how appalling it becomes! Just a few instances are: Grey River, Dobson No 2, Leviathan, Maori Queen, Rockland’s, Waipuna, Reeves’ Proprietary, and even the Nelson Creek, which has so far proved the mainstay of the dredging, is credited with having too feeble driving power. All these dredges either contemplate changes or have undergone changes since construction, and none of them are able to handle tlieir claims satisfactorily. These alone represent, at lowest estimate, £60,000 capital, which as we see is not being used to anything like its possible earning value. These matters, however, appertain- chiefly to the directors and engineers of companies. The shareholders’ greatest and most unnecessary loss arises from a different reason—namely, the great fluctuations in the market value of scrip. This results of course from the reprehensible practices of speculators—anxious to make much money in as short a time as possible, and the bona fide investor pays for shares which cannot long maintain their undue price. Now a broker is a man who makes his living by commission on sales of shares, and it is out of all reason to expect that he will do other than give this buying and selling every encouragement in his power. And so we have claims whose scrip is at a price which would only give a reasonable return for the invested money if the dredge were getting tw» or three times its present revenue. Their shares are quoted at prices which no one can understand as the claims, so far, have not warranted it. Vendors and promoters are naturally sanguine as to the capabilities of the properties they offer, but once a company lias been floated the directors and brokers become responsible for the reports put in circulation, regarding the ultimate prospects of the claim as a payable venture. That they should be sanguine is also natura l enough, but what purpose do they serve by putting the shares up to an impossible value? Royal Commissions on Coal Mines, on Rivers, on Railways, on Education, on Federation — in fact, on every matter of public importance have of late been at work, eliciting expert evidence as to the working of these various institutions, and very valuable evidence too. Why not, then, have a Royal Commission on dredging to find out why so much of the public money has been uselessly spent, with the result of hindering and dwarfing the growth of an industry that could have easily absorbed the spare funds of a colony, with the assurance of a certain and profitable return ? I am, etc., — Investor.

Eeefton, May 22. [Portions of letter have had to be excised. Our correspondent will note that we cannot prink libellous matter.— Ed., E.S.]