A CURIOUS PROSPECTUS.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume V, Issue 121, 25 May 1870, Page 2

A CURIOUS PROSPECTUS.

To the Editor of the Nelson Evening Mail. i I Sm, — My attention having been directed to an article which appeared in this morning's Colonist, under the head of a "Curious Prospectus," the writer is wrong in stating that the projector of the " Maitai and Aniseed Valley Gold Prospecting Company," ever called at the Colo?iist office for the purpose of asking Dr. Hector's telegram to be published in jthe newspaper. He is also wrong in istating that particulars of weight of bag

was not furnished to Dr. Hector, viz., lib. 4oz. of black and grey sand, giving result as per telegram. This was obtained from sluicing the mullock or surface casing alongside the leader, and not from stone; the weight of the stuff sluiced may be as stated in the Colonist or less, it was not weighed. And the sample of gold in the possession of Messrs. Thompson and Stavert was obtained from the crushed stone and mullock. The result of neither test can be termed payable, except by putting through proper machinery a large body of stuff, when the bulk of the fine gold could be saved; but in all probability the main body of stone would be found payable after being opened up. The projector most emphatically denies that there is anything stated iv the prospectus calculated to mislead, nor has he personally at any time duriug his prospecting iv the neighborhood of the Maitai acted or made statements calculated to mislead anyone. He holds an honest conviction, based on ascertained facts, and he thinks he has as much right to act on those convictions as any other person believing that labor is the fountain of all wealth, and that unless capital and labor be directed towards the development of the minerals existing in the districts referred to in the prospectus, the realisation of which cannot be accomplished.

j " Excessive wealth " says a graphic writer "iv the person of individuals, is no boon to the community if.it were not so concentrated it would still exisb aud probably^, nay, almost certainly, would have been employed to far better purposes." So much for the half-crowns being lost, as hinted at by the writer of the article in question. Trusting that the above explanation will prove satisfactory, or if not, the defendant, pleads not indebted, and that the pleadings of the plaintiff are ne dum pactum, therefore, the motion is for a non-suit. Yours, &c, James Sims. May 25, 1870.