RICHMOND HILL MINE.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XIIL, Issue 106, 6 May 1878, Page 2

RICHMOND HILL MINE.

To the Editor of the 'Evening Mail.'

Sir— The letter of Mr T. L. Morley, late manager of the Richmond Hill mine, whicli appeared in your paper yesterday, requires some notice on the part of the Directors of the Company, and I will accordingly request you to find room for a few comments upon it. Before dealing with Mr Morley's figures I cannot avoid remarkiug that he does not deny or palliate his neglect of duty in omitting to furnish his Directors with an estimate of what he considered to be the reai value of the ore raised, although expressly requested to do so weeks before the report was framed. No part of the duty of a mining manager is more clearly incumbent on him than that, residing on the spot, daily conversant with the work, and having obtained the situation on the strength of possessing superior knowledge and judgment, he should supply the Board, resident at a distance, and not possessed of his special talent, with the most accurate facts and the most reliable opinions. But this Mr Morley failed to do, and consequently the censure he bestows on the Directors he might with more reason, and better taste, have taken to himself. It is to no purpose that he dwells on information tendered after the aunual meeting. Why was it withheld until it could not be utilised? And why has he waited still another year before disburdening hia mind to the shareholders? At Richmond Hill, as I believe in all silver mines, the quality of the ore varies much at short removes. To judge, therefore of the average quality, it is needful either to smelt it in mass, or to make numerous assays. Now as Mr Morley did not smelt— indeed, he never professed any practical knowledge of metallurgy— it was his assays that furnished the materials for coming at an average estimate, which it was necessary to give among the assets of the company. The manager sent the Directors a series of such assays, thirteen in number, and has now published them, but has not worked the average result, which, however, any of your readers cau easily do for himself. He will find that the thirteen assays average 289 ounces of silver to the ton, which is a good deal higher than the figure adopted by the Directors. It is true that Mr Morley wrote of a peculiarly rich specimen, "I do not think there is much like it," so that, as he implies, the average estimate would be unduly raised' by its assays. This I readily grant, but it must also be stated, per contra, that the first two specimens in his list were not silver ore at all, but some slatey stuff containing traces of silver, as almost all the rocks at Richmond Hill do contain. By reckoning iv these specimens, (with their oue ounce and three ounces of silver to the ton of stuff, along with those of ore), it must be evident to every one that the average result 13 unduly lowered. After all, the estimate of 250 ounces deduced from the data furnished by the manager is a good deal lower than what might have been calculated from the assays made at the Colonial Laboratory. Mr Morley haviug somewhat rashly referred to his sorting of the ore, I must touch oq that point also. I admit that he spent a good deal of money over that operation, and had it been performed with corresponding efficiency there would have been no reason to complain. But while on the one hand some capital silver ore was pitched into the river, on the other the heap put ou one side as worthless and described in JMr Morley's letter as " refuse," contains excellent ore also, as Dr Hector noticed with; surprise at his last visit. Fortunately it has not been thrown away. Mr Morley has little reason to complain of the way in which he is referred to in the report. His skill a3 a chemist that qualification for his post which the Directors all continued to believe in, was referred to in handsome terms, while shortcomings' were passed over in silence except the one affecting the estimate of the ore, which required elucidation, as even Mr M. will admit. On other matters I will adopt the same forbearance, as it is neither necessary nor pleasing to dwell on deficiencies. I have no wish to injure Mr Morley, but simply to defend myBelf and colleagues against an unjust and wanton imputation. If the Richmond Hill mine does not prove a commercial success,

the reason will lie in the expeuse of working and pushing explorations on to the largest " bonanzas," noyl think, iv the low quality of the ore, for were it as poor as Mr Morley considers*, it wouid still be richer than that of the celebrated niines in the American Unioni— l am, &c , tf. W\ Irvine, Chairman R. H. M. Co. Nelson, May 3, 1878.