Eureka daily sentinel. [volume] (Eureka, Nev.) 1871-1887, 1878-09-21
RICHMOND CONSOLIDATED MIN
ING COMPANY.

We copy the following from the London
Mining Journal Of August 18th:
Srn-I hold no shares, and never did
hold one in this company, and in all prob
ability never shall, but having been much
engaged in English mining operations in
Western America l have been appealed to
by some of my friends, large shareholders
in this company, as to my opinion about
the position and prospects OF their prop
erty. 1 have beer through many Of the
mining districts of America, and into a
large number Of the mines, but not into the
Richmond Consolidated, therefore cannot
speak from personal knowledge, but can
merely say that l never heard but one
opinion amongst miners as to the great
value Of the property, and that it is simply
a mine Of untold wealth, anu every appear
ance Of its produce being permanent, and
that it will take years to absorb the ore
which is already opened up in the mine.
/ fear from what / know that the share
holders are suffering from what appears TO
me very like "a ring" formed by the gen.
tlemen who constituted your committee Of
inquiry, who proceeded to Nevada in alli-
ance with men in influential positions in
the company in England, and the profess
sional men they called into their assistance.
OF some facts l am personally aware which
look like anything but fair play to the
shareholders. For instance, Colonel
Stcuart, one Of the committee, when in
America under your pay and in you
employment, applied for the position of
manager TO another English company in
Utah, undertaking 10 remain in America in
charge Of their mine and works. This
offer was accepted by the English Board.
nf which nr Movburv nto ~ cxx~ nj
~rectors. was also q member. Colonel
Stewart then left this company in the
lurch, after their acceptance Of his pro-
posal, and returned to England, l presume,
to manipulate Richmond matters, and TO
render an account Of his stewardship; but
l am inclined to believe that on that ac-
count no mention was made by him or by
DR.. Maybury OF this incident in his beha-
vior while under your pay, and supposed
TO be attending to your interests in America.
Your committee engaged the services Of
an enginecr-Mr. B-rereton-wh0 had been
employed for some years on water and other
engineering schemes in California, but l
have never heard OF his connection before
this with any mines, and therefore cannot
give an opinion as to his capabilities as .
mining expert; but it seems to me a most
extraordinary proceeding, at least. thai after
receiving FL 900 from this company for .
report on their property, he should return
to England and attack the value Of that
property in the columns Of the Mining
Journal. Where has professional feeling
gone or where can any confidence be placed
in future by shareholders in sending IN
engineer to report OF their mines II he, or his
return, reports in the columns OF the
newspapers his opinion Of their property.
either good, bad or Indifferent As re-
CARDS the other members Of your COM
mittee - Messrs. Bayliss and Pulbrook-I
think it would have been fairer if they had
made known to the shareholders all they
knew in disparagement Of the property
Immediately on their return, and not i'm
mediately after disposing OF their shares,
as / am credibly informed they did. In
conclusion, / do hope the shareholder will
take care Of what l AIN sure is a most val
liable property. and not allow it to be
iuined by interested parties as nearly all
the other English properties in America
have been. and that they will endeavor in
future to lie represented by people who
will at least let them have-FAIR PLAY.
FAR Play" takes a very correct view Of
the Richmond Company's property in
Eureka. 1t is as valuable to-day as it has
been at any time within the past five years,
and future developments will probably
prove it to be more valuable than ever be-
fore. We are fully convinced that the
shareholders, did not. in their report.
make the showing that the Richmond
Company's property is justly entitled