THE MINES STATEMENT

Hokitika Guardian, 25 October 1928, Page 2

THE MINES STATEMENT

(Hansard Deport.) ( In the House of Representatives in discussing the annual report of the Mines Department, Mr Seddon said We have heard a lot this afternoon about coal-miningih.nd the tribute system and the co-opera tiy.e system. It is a well-known fivct that in the Greymouth district the co-operative .system is becoming more and more popular, hnd it behoves the Mines Department, and particularly the Minister of Mines, to have drawn up such..regulationsip connection with tjfnt system’of mining as will obviate justices,Distances of which I will immediately 'relate. I

make no apology, nor do I hesitate, in bringing to the notice of the Prime Minister a case of • injustice . that is being talked abqut iri of the GreymoUth district,- and I want the Prime Minister/tq raake perfectly, sure by regulations that a similar .case will not occur again. A number of, my constituents have made application for licenses in the coal-mining district, and certain of the applications have been turned down without any proper

reason being giyem for such .action. I make a plea this Afternoon on behalf ■ of certain as decent, young fellows as you could wish to meet lwho haye made application and been refused licenses, whilst qtherg have been preferred before them. In making this statement I want to be quite sure of the fact otfthe case, and I wish, with your forbearance, Mr Speaker, to quote the correspondence that took place between this party—Moor© and others—and the Mines Department' and interested per-i sons, so that anybody who cares to read it can judge for himself. The matter is one of Buch local importance thast I think it is time it was ventilated, in order that any one may see what are the merits of the ease. At the outset I should explain, in regard to Moore and party, that Mr Moore had been working in the State Coalmines Department, while' another member of the party—Stewart —had been in the Department for twenty-, live years, and anothei*—Mr O’Neill —- is still working in the Department. InApril of this year two of the party; wrote" to the Minister ■ of Mines as follows:

“As two of the original applicants for the coal area between the two tunnels on the Rewgnui Railway line, we protest against any other party being granted the area without us being included in the party. We, along with others, applied for this .area in 1923, and were promised the area by both Messrs James and Kembelfif we could get permission from the Railways Department to erect bins, etc. We understand that permission is now, to be granted. Wb beg, therefore, to be included in any co-operative party that is to woyk the area, as we were told no one else but our party would get same if permission was given for working same area.” Their statement is perfectly clear; and the statement made to me is that they were promised this lease by both the Under-Secretary and the Manager of the Coal-mines. The Minister of Mines wrote to W. Moore and P. Ste Wart, referring to the coal-hearing land near the seven-mile peg and Rewanui Branch Railway line:—. •. >, “ It does not necessarily follow that application to be granted the right to work small portions of the State Coal Reserve have to be decided by priority of application.”

That argument was used, in replying to this party and others, and that is why it is thought that some sinister influence was brought to bear to jockey them but of the lease. The letter goes

on:— ! “ All applications are dealt with from time to time on their merits, and , having due regard to the circumstances which may then exist. Messrs Williams and party have been granted the right to work an area in the locality referred to by yourself, subject to terms and conditions which are now satisfactory to the Railways Department. r As regards your desire to be included as ihembers of that party, I have to advise that’this is essentially a matter for arrangement with the f party referred to.” There was !no attempt to deny the fact that Williams and party made application subsequent to the application of Moore and party/; ' Then, Messrs Moore, Stewartvand? O'Neill; who were turned down by ' jbhe Mines .Department, wrote another letter/to-tbe Minister-off Mines, as follows; v ... ‘‘ln 1923 we applied for a lease at seven-mile peg, Rewanui line, and the following are the harries rof the parties submitted to the Superintendent of the State Coal-mines: P. Stewart, W. Moore, G. McKenzie, W. Marshall, J. Duggan, D. O’Neill..'?' -Recently this lease has been* granted to T. S. Williams and party, and I interviewed Mr T. 8. Williams and asked him for the naines of the party, and he told me the names of four of the party. He said he could not divulge the names of the other three members of the party.' W. Marshall' is in another co-operative party—viz., Boote and party—arid his son has got his share in T. S. Williams Sn 3 pSrty, also G. McKenzie has been given a share. I had occasion to interview Mr Hunter, who informed me that I—W. Moore—had a chance of getting a share in it, but P. Stewart * had no chance, as he would only be in it on speculative purposes. Under the circumstances, we were always led to believe that the first applicant had the prior right to all co-operative leases. I would* esteem it a great favour if you will oblige me by giving the three remaining members of Mr T. S. Wil- ' • liams and party. As I think that we have been unjustly treated, and, failing the information, I think I am quite justified in proceeding further with this matter.”

All three members of Moore’s party also have taken this matter up. Moore, Stewart, and O’Neill were prepared, and are still prepared, personally to work a lease. The Prime Minister replied to Mr P. Stewart: — “ All applications are dealt with having regard to their , merits and to the conditions which may prevail from time to time as the applications are received. The position that existed when your application was made about seven years ago has materially changed since-then. I also desire to point out that the law regarding the granting of leases over portions of the State Coal Reserve is not governed by the statutory provisions relating to applications for coal-mining rights over Crown such reserve. Moreover, some of the other, co-operative parties have been, and are still working areas in respect of which prior applications have been '.'made; without succe.sk, by other persoiis.i'to obtain a right to work such areasij'hjThis' aspect is men-, tionbd as indica|ing‘ that applications for leasing portions of the State Coal Reserve have nob been, nor are being, deal#-with in or'dqr of ’ priority of receipt of application.” , V . And this is the stinging part of the letter: —

“?For good and: sufficient reasons a leasb was granted to T. S. Williams and party over the area applied lor by them, and after the coal on such area had been kept intact for some years.” ' ■Th'at is the part that hurts. Wlmt were the ‘.‘good and sufficient reasons” ? What was the sinister ■ influence at work? The great injustice of the matter ‘is that the Prime Minister has already admitted in his letter that the application was made by Moore and party, prior to the application that was granted—seven years, in fact, previously. The names of the party comprising the original Williams’s partv are as follows: — , ... “T. S. Willaims, G. McKenzie, H. Harvey, N. Price, J. W. Marshall, A. Bradley, A. Mayo, C. McAuley.” Mr Williams, secretary' of the Williams party, wrote to Mr Moore to this effect:— r-

“In reply to you re your application to become a member of our party, am instructed to* inform you that we cannot see our way clear to increase the number of our party. I might say that Mr J. O’Connell was speaking to xtie yesterday, and he, like yourself and Mr Stewart, claims to have a prior right to the lease, hut can show nothing on paper that he has any such claim.”

The only right of priority was their formal application seven years ago to the Mines Department, and that application was in proper form. The letter continues:—

“ Anyhow, as far as I am concerned in connection with this lease, ! applied for it and it was granted.-' I also applied to the Railway authorities for the right to build bins and load coal. That has also been granted. ' We have now started on the lease and built our washhouse, and are now driving towards the coal. This is all I can say in connection with this lease. I have done only what any other miner would hdve done if' the opportunity offered. You might show Mr Stewart this note, as I promised to let you both know the result of the decision of my party.” Feeling very hurt about this matter Mr Moore, wrote to Messrs. Webb and Hunter in Christchurch and complained about the treatment that had been meted out to them, and this is a copy of the letter:—

“RE WILLIAMS AND PARTY’S LEASE.

“In reference to the above matter I have to advise you that I am still dissatisfied with the treatment meted out to me as regards my non-inclus-ion in the party, as I had every confidence in receiving fair treatment from you both, together with Mr Hunter’s promise to try and include me as a member of the party. I have been advised by the Prme Minister the list of names of the above party, and, as four of the names mentioned are not in the employ of the State Coal-mines, I am led to believe three of these men work in your coal-yards, and the other, Nelson Price, is a horse trainer. I fail to see how my inclusion in the party could have been refused, you being aware of the fact that I was an employee at the State Coal-mine for a period of sixteen years.” That is the part that my constituents object to most strenuously, and that is the inclusion in a co-operative party of dummies—men whose names . are simply given in and who have no intention of working these leases—and that is what I want the Prime Minister, , who is now in charge of the Mines Department, to inquire into, so that this system of “dummyism” may be finished with once for all. The letter goes on: — - “Referring to , my conversation with.Mr Hunter when in Christchurch a few weeks ago, he advised me that he only knew the names of four members of the party. I have now reason to believe that the other four names’ of the members of the party were included to obtain the lease, and, to my mind, have no intention to work the lease with the remainder of the party.” It would be interesting to find out from an inquiry how many of the original naines handed in are working the lease, or whether it was just a system of “dummyism” which must be stopped. The letter continues: — “After considering the whole matter I have decided to give you a final chance to do something for me before putting the whole matter in the hands of the member for the district to take the matter up on my behalf. I also intend to use the press to expose the unjust way I have been treated/'" 1 have no desire to adopt the latter course, but I am reluctantly compelled to do so under the circumstances. Trusting you will give this matter your immediate attention, as it is my

intention to take steps immediately after the 22nd inktant failing receiving a satisfactory reply from you.” That is signed by W. Moore. There was a letter then from Williams tc Moore.—

“Firstly, I wish to state that,'as fa? as Hunter and Webb are concerned, wo do not claim them as having any share in the mine whatsoever. Secondly, that all correspondence in connection with the party should come t< nm. seeing that T have been appointed secretary of the party. Thirdly, i

can only- say, in answer to your statements, that everything in connection with mine, as far as I can see, luc been carried out the same as many other leases granted l>v the Government. 1

That is the part of the letter which contains a statement of a. state of affairs which is',not' a happy one or the Mines DeparmcSr to face. There is a. statement by one of the successful applicants that they had only done what had been done by -others—namely, that they had simply put in dummy,names and jockeyed another party out "of its rights. I want to say in .fairness to the Prime Minister, that 1 represented the matter to him and showed him 'how unjustly my constituents had been treated. He went in. to the matter-, and said he would do what he could to put matters right, and asked me what I would suggest. The. suggestion I made was that these men should be still given the right to join up with William's and party, and so become members of the party which got the lease which Moore originally applied for. I saw these men in Greymouth, and they were quite agreeable to join Williams and party and also made the request that the original applicant, M. D. O’Neil, he included; but they still objected to the four dummy names being included in the application. Williams and party however, refused to take these 'inert-■"in, arid they could not be forced to. They then had the lease, and had got the Department to spent money on bins and gangway, and in other ways to help them in their venture. They were, of course on the box-seat, and they refused to take Moore and party in. Hie only other way, then, to help Moore and party was to suggest to the Mines Department that it grant them a similar lease, or the lease of an area which it might he valuable foil them to work Mr Moore wired to me in "Wellington “No suitable area available, therefore offer not acceptable. We require our share in the present lease, and failing that proceed to bring up before the House, also to publish same in press.”

The present position is that the L tide r-Secretary for Mines is investigatiiig to find a lease suitable for these men to work. But there are so few leases available that these men will never have the opportunity of being on such a good area. They have been denied the right through no. fault of their own. I know that the Mines Department may say that some years ago an application was put in by another party—J. Beban • but that could not in any way be considered a formal letter describing no particular area. It has Been stated that this was put in prior to the application of Moore and party. But the Under-Secretary is having the whole matter investigated, with the hope—and ,it is a pretty remote hope—that a lease may be granted to Moore and party of equal value to the one Williams and party "have got. This matter has been a great deal talked about in Grevmonth and I think it only right to bring it up i.and ventilate it, give all the correspondence on it, and let the .people know—and there are a great many interested in it—how the granting of the leases has been carried on. I would welcome the fullest investigation into the matter. - I might-make a suggestion to the Minister of Mines in respect to it, because these applications for co-operative leases are going to be considered' for a good time yet- ; and that suggestion is that proper regulation application-forms should be drawn up so that there can be no mistake as to the areas for which applications are made and so that the possibilities of “dummyism” shall he eliminated once for all. Such a system would cut out speculation and prevent applications being made in the names of men in Christchurch and elsewhere who have no intention of working these mines. In the case under review application was made in the names of a horse-trainer and two men working in a coal-vard in Christchurch. Tt does not redound to the credit of the Department that that sort of thing should he. I also ha Ye here a statement as to two other men—-Scott and Robertson. It is stated that the Department is trying to get Robertson an area which is held up in Coal Creek, and that the case of Scott is being investigated. I hope that these matters will he conducted in future in a right and equitable manner, with proper consideration given to the time of applications and also to the suitability of the parties applying. It is no good grant- I ing the applications of men of straw, who are just figureheads, or dummies: and that sort of thing has been only too common on the West Coast. Now, in reference to the Minos Statement. I was very pleased to hear the speech by the honourable member for Oliinemuri, who has made a very earnest plea to the Government for some consideration for the gold-mining industry. ~ He has worked out his theory very well indeed—that unless prospectors are assisted there is not very much hope of progress in the goldmining industry.- If the honourable member had liked to quote, he could have quoted the doleful decline in the production of gold each year. We have only to look at the Mines Statement of last year—the latest available report — to find that the prod notion of gold has gone off considerably.

The value of gold aiul silver won in 1925 was £540,020, and flic figure went down in 1920 to £539,302. The only bright feature about the Mines Statement of last year was the iaot that gold-dredging had improved, the gold won by that means having increased considerably on the production of the year bolore. But there was a remarkable thing about the production of gold from {hedging; practically all the gold won from dredging was won on the west coast of the South Island. The Rimu dredge, operating near Hokitika, won .047,900, and 02,229 was won by the New River derdge, working neai Greymoutli. That was practically the whole of the gold won by ..dredging in the Dominion. The honourable member for Wakatipu is checking trie-, but' those are the 'figures: Possibly this year’s report will show that the dredges in Otago were more successful. The honourable member for Ohinemuri pointed out the desirability ot assisting prospecting parties. It does seem to me necessary now for the Department to bestir’ itself and regulate a system of prospecting, and send out-' more men than have been scut out hitherto. For instance, last year throughout the whole Dominion there were only 155 prospectors assisted by the State. The result- of that cannot be very encouraging because when you take the goldfields and the mineral fields throughout New Zealand the quantity of work that 155 men enn do is very slight inedeed. If vou take the country from Marlborough, through Nelson, Karnmea, Westport, and right .on to Westland, you will find there were only fory-five men engaged in prospecting; and'the reports, as far as T. can understand, have been verv discouraging. M hat I would suggest is that some systematic kind of reporting and eo-ordinarien between > these parties should be effecttd,. so that' when one party discovers anything, whether, it. he gold, silver, or other kind of mineral, the results should be handed on to the Mines ■Department, so that tlmre might, still arise what the honourable member for Ohinemuri hopes for—a new era in the mining industry. As far as dredging is concerned, I want the Minister of Mines and the Mines Department' to help along that industry in every way, because by the new system of mining by electricity much better results have been achieved. I refer particularly to the dredge lit Rimu. where gold to the value of £237,970 has been won since that dredge began to' operate a few years ago. Another dredge is going to operate at Okarito, in South Westland. The company working that dredge will want every assistance from the Government,' arid I think it- behoves the Government to' assist such people in every posible' way. 4he company is going to work on 1 an old alluvial field, and now,* \v’ith the more scientific means of winning gold by dredging, it is hoped there will he a future

for that part of Xew Zealand. Like the honourable member of Ohinemuri. I certainly hope tliat with a little energy infused .into the Department and with systematic prospecting and assistance to dredging, the good mining days will return.