MINING MONOPOLIES.

Grey River Argus, Volume XI, Issue 996, 5 October 1871, Page 3

MINING MONOPOLIES.

[to the editor.]

Sir — After reading your correspondent's letter from the Keefs, in which he so clearly points out the evils of the " leasing monopoly" there, it occurred to me that, with your permission, I could show to the miners of this district, a monopoly equally as great which exists here in the shape of a " water monopoly." As it is nearer home it m?ght be interesting, and as it amounts to a "notice to quit" to nine-tenths of the miners of the district, 1 hope, by some united movement being brought to bear on the "powers that be," to have it altered. I have often noticed in the Argus that many miners complained they were obliged to leave this upper New River district, on account of the scarcity of water for sluicing purposes, there being a sluicing prospect obtainable in nearly every terrace on both sides of the river, from No Name to within a mile or two of Lake Brimner. Now, there is no district on the West Coast better watered, nor better adapted for sluicing purposes, as there are on the south side of the New River alone eight large tributaries, which ought certainly to employ from five to eight parties, or wore, in favorable weather ; but, unfortunately for the prosperity of the district, a monopoly has been quietly obtained in every instance by a single party of a few men to nearly all the water in these tributaries ; and by some peculiar reading of the present regulations by wardens and judges, there is no such thing as breaking through this monopoly. When an attempt is made in the Warden's Court to test a title where, by some Iwcm pocus system of registration and amalgamation — say five men mates, working in one party, are permitted to hold, say anywhere from •three to ten heads of water, a formidable array of certificates of registration are generally produced, ranging from the Great Extended of seven, to the simple fossicker's certificate of one head, and after the Warden has failed to see any occasion to use the power given him by rule 160 of the Regulations, or to make any enquiries as to the mode in which certificates have been obtained, parties are allowed to stick to their monopoly, and we are told, "we can appeal;" but we know that already, and if an appeal is made, what is the consequence? — the judge will tell us he " cannot go behind certificates of registration;" and as the cabmen say, "there we are." Verily, verily, Mr Warden Schaw's dictum has at last proved true, and " the Wardens are the law." Now, Mr Editor, any one having occasion to attend Wardens' Courts knows the amount of attention generally paid to that wholesome bit of advice tendered in rule 188 of the present Regulations, and that unless certificates of registration are cancelled by the Warden, or reasons given for not doing so, an appeal is, by a recent decision, sure to result as stated above, and we have the absurdity of a .Warden's decision ruling the Judge's powers on appeal. Much has been written and said about the discretionary powers given to Wardens, but it is surely nearly time that in cases such as water rights, a distinct law should be made on the subject, and titles of value not left to a discretion which may be influenced by a badly-digested breakfast or a flood in the New River, • . ; Mr Dungan cannot surely be in ignorance of this evil, and if this hint could induce him to change the word " may" to "shall" in rule 188, he would be the means of preventing many of us poor unfortunate miners -of this miserably regulated district from looking for a better land at Gulgong or some other distant Eldorado. 1 am, &c. Grey Shirt. New River, September 22, 1871.