THE PROVIDENCE GOLDMINING COMPANY (REGISTERED).

Thames Guardian and Mining Record, Volume I, Issue 18, 27 October 1871, Page 3

THE PROVIDENCE GOLDMINING COMPANY (REGISTERED).

To the Editor Of IIIK THAMES GUARDIAN. Sir,—Since the decision given in the above case by the Warden a good deal has been said and written on the subject; but there can be no doubt that a great portion, especially of what has beeu written on it, has come from interested sources, and must therefore ue accepted as being rationally blind to a true conception of the whole case.

No person will deny that the Warden heard both sides of this case before he came to conclusion as to the decision to be given upon it, and consequently that that decision was as fair aud impartial as law or justice would permit of being given on it or any other similar case, Then this being so, one naturally asks himself the question what is the cause of the subsequent remarks on this case,which appeared in last Monday’s Herald , as in an article in it on the subject referred to. The writer would fain give ns to understand that in the above case there has beeu altogether a miscarriage of justice. To my mind the reasons for so doing are very evident, more especially when we call to mind the many acts of glaring injustice which have been hitherto perpetrated on this field and no notice whatever taken of them by those persons who now exhibit such virtuous indignation in this case. Indeed no person need ask what are the reasons for such a course of conduct, because he will readily . understand that in the one case the parties were poor and obscure men, and, of course, might was right; but that in the other this order of things was reversed, aud therefore so is the interest felt in those comparative instances. Well, sir, in the above case it may suit the interest of the Herald to call the plaintiffs “ jumpers,” &c., but this suggests the question, has the Herald or its conferes (in its commercial or speculative morality) ever come under the title of “jumpers,” or any other opprobious epithet ? Oh, no, of course not. Or has it ever denounced the capitalist’s hireling agent on this field who has with the sanction of law, robbed and plundered

many a poor man of his titles and interests in mining property? I will not be too hard on him, it was none of his business, of course, to do so, and as he had no interest in such matters it woidd not have suited his moralityjto have interfered—decidedly not. Now, with reference to the ‘Providence,’ I have no interest whatever in it, and I have no hesitation in saying that as the plaintiff’s have done in this case, I know of no man who would not do likewise in it or any other similar case, not even excepting those persons who have made such strictures in the whole affair. In conclusion I may remark, I am certain that whatever may be written on this subject it can have but very little influence on the result, notwithstanding Our Herald hath proclaimed its saying, See iEsop dancing and his monkey playing. So the Herald may play, and his monkeys dance away as long as they may think fit to do so, because it is apparent that it is not on account of a so-called miscarriage of justice in this case that he feels so indignant, but simply because the issue ef it docs not suit his own interest. I can only say to him better luck next time.— I am, &c., A Miner. Thames, Oct. 20th, 1871.