THE NEW GOLDFIELDS BILL WITH RESPECT TO QUARTZ MINING.

Tuapeka Times, Volume VI, Issue 290, 21 August 1873, Page 6

THE NEW GOLDFIELDS BILL WITH RESPECT TO QUARTZ MINING.

Thewriterof alongletter on the above subject addressed to the " Mount Ida Chronicle," requests us to reproduce it in our columns. We have not space at our disposal to insert the whole of the letter, but we make the following extracts from it : — " Reefing in Otago has so far been, excepting in some two or three instances, merely surface work, followed by abandonment — resulting in effectually staying the employment of capital in the developement of the undoubted resources of our Goldfields. Everybody agrees tbatour reefs contain as much gold as should make their workings remunerative, that they are numerous, and, with the exception of timber, facilities for successful developement exist within the reach of ordinary effort on almost every goldfield. The question naturally arises, where is the cure ? where is the remedy to be sought? That remedy I bolieve to be a much more liberal provision as to size and cost of claims. The greatest extent the law allows to be occupied in one lease is twelve hundred feet along the course of the reef. So that for every section of such extent, the indispensable preliminary dead works have to be incurred , whereas the shaft once sunk, or the level once driven, six or ten times the extent of ground may be as easily worked through them as the present very limited area to which the law confines operations. I need not, I am sure, point out to you what a waste of energy, of labor, of capital, both to individuals and to the community is involved in this state of things — followed, as these preliminary works are, by fif the prospects are encouraging) separate costs of crushing plant, pumping and winding gear for each twelve hundred feet, and consequent large increase in current working expenditure — for each battery means four to six hands, and waste of fuel in maintaining six fires, where one of somewhat larger dimensions would do the work of six. Some will say, to adopt the liberal measures prevailing in Victoria, would encourage monopoly and be injurious to the poor . miner. My reply to this is that such has ever been the cry of the narrow-minded of my fellow miners, both there and here, and the less it is listened to by the Government tbe better will it be for all. The days of heavy finds, and inexpensive preliminary operations are past, and mining is now no longer rerauuerative with the rude appliances of that era. To get at the gold now in payable quantities requires both skill and canital, except in very ra?e instances; and if sufficient encouragement be not afforded to the employment of these it is not diffioult to foresee retrogression instead of progress. A word as to charges for mining leases : What need of the excessive cost of obtaining and holding a lease ? Any miner of ordinary ability could survey a lease area as well for all practical purposes as the Government surveyor ; and, even if his services be indispensible, why should the miner be charged with it all ? Next, the rent is no less than £2 10s. per acre — a most preposterous rate. It appears to me that leases on quartz reefs should be granted at even a lower rent than on alluvial workings, for whilst the reefer only disturbs a very insignificant portion of the surface, for which this heavy rent is paid, tbe alluvial miner disturbs the whole, indeed destroys, the land wrought for all future uses. I think that justice would be amply met by a mere nominal rental, especially in the face of (without exception) the heavy

outlay involved to simply prove the likelihood of a reef proving remunerative, before any possible return can be obtained. Another matter, and I have done, viz., the manner in which the quartz reefs are marked out. The Regulations allow of provision being made in the marking, to include the lode to a depth of say from three to six hundred feet, according to its underlay. After this depth, the reef, which may have cost thousands of pounds to prove to such a depth, may become the property of another without a shilling of outlay, and as the promoter cannot, according to the existing law, follow it beyond the boundary of his lease — he having no further use for his shaft or shafts — his neighbour may reap the benefit both of the work and the information gained by the reef being proved to that depth, literally without cost. Many other arguments may be advanced in support of my position, but as my letter is already too long, I will conclude, hopino our legislators will recognise the necessity of effecting some greater improvements than the rough draft of the Bill proposes. — I am, &c, A QUABTZ MINEB.