Ohinemuri Goldfield.

Thames Star, Volume XV, Issue 4859, 6 August 1884, Page 2

Ohinemuri Goldfield.

(pbom ox:b own cobbespondent.)

Pabboa, Yesterday. KARANGA-HAEE. ; From the very outset this section of the field has generally been looked upon and spoken of as ,a "duffer?' which; may be attributed partly to the fact that , tlie reefs operated on immediately after the opening of Ohiriemuri for gold miningpurposes did not prove to be remunerative/ and partly to the fact that since gold was discovered here 2f years ago the principal mines were brought under the control of men who had no practical knowledge of the reef systemi ; peciliarj;toV(|i^ district, and whose system of-operations^puld, long ere this^ have landed Karangahaka on a " !eo- shore,", had ittibt besen forthe timely discoveryof goUHnthe?SirWaltec \ Scott mine." This mine bids fair to eclipse as a gold producer all the other mines that have; been, worked hitherto, in. this, field. ' In the slopes the reef is'? about • sit ftset wide, and shows gold freely in various places throughout the whole body'of/tHe^ stone. Oh Saturday last the clean up from the plates for 12 hours' run with 16" head of stampers yielded 52ozs hard squeezed hot water amalgam, of which there is how about 700pzs on hand from the, plates alone, arid the show in the stamper boxes would indicate a handsome return at the general cleaning up, which will take place about Saturday next. {~jj : IrANHOE.-^The aerial tramway cbn« necting this mine with the Hauraki Com*j pany's battery will be complete in every;* particular in the course «jf a few diygyi and crashing operations: will: be njaxtslur order. The stopes Jin ;the Sir ; Scott mine arebeing'worked right the Ivanhoe'B southern bonndary,^atjrhicfi; v^ point the stone is^riob,?in;"the; :pr9ipionlt'"-' metal, and there can' be; no two opinions * - about the value of the reef that, direction. ;-..■ ■■':''--::';?C '\-,.;:v; .•;■-.; ;\'--:::V;b X'' v : '" ■:' '-.'■ ':'

Local shareholders in this mine are at 'a, considerable loss to understand the reason ;why a notice calling the annual meeting of shareholders was not inserted in ■') the Thames papers. The only intimation they :got respectingrthe same^ #*8J tnirb«gh¥th^s medium of last Saturday's^ isiue of-tbj Auckland Weekly News, which a brief but very unsatisfactory account -ofa meeting of shareholders i held at the company's officebn the Thursday previous to the issue of thej; paper. This^ surely; cannot- have been the annual meetiD^of shareholders ? If so the proceedings are highly isuggestive ; of is \ generally termed the "hole and corner'^baaineas^