Eureka daily sentinel. [volume] (Eureka, Nev.) 1871-1887, 1878-08-23
RICHMOND CONSOLIDATED.

The War of the St0ckhOlders-Ex.
Chairman Elliott to the Rescue
Of the Directory ~Interestins
Figures Regarding the Cost Of
Smelling.
The last London Mining Journal at hand
contains the following letter from ex-Chair-
man Elliott Of the Richmond Company:
No better illustration can be needed of
the animus actuating the Committee of
Investigation than that offered in the letter
Of Mr.. John Bayliss, which appeared in
last weeks Journal. In his letter of July
3 he sets ont certain statements, which he
calls - facts" by way OF instituting a conn
parison between the dgings Of the Rich
mond and the results Of he proceedings Of
the Eureka and most assuredly, if there
was any truth in the contrast he depicts it
would be time, as he asserts, to effect
some reform in the administration not
only in Nevada but in this country" He
dwells with especial r%nction, as on a proof
that admits Of no doubt, that whereas
g the Eureka has paid its capital five times
over, the RicIm' nd, at the average Of Is
per cent. per nntun, would only have done
so once AT the date Of this statement
Mr.. Dayliss must have known that the net
S@t VI - NtiAOuitCn W
f463. SIT, as against about f560, go Of the
Eureka Company. which had been at work
Is months longer, and out OF whose earn
ings over $3.50, 900 had been obtained from
the ore under the Potts chamber in our
ground, from which the committee state
the Eureka mine had made the sun OF
$4,000 q month profit for some 10
months" Not content with giving our
unscr upulous neighbors the benefit of this
abstraction OF our property as q tribute to
their superior enterprise and management,
Mr.. Bayliss further glorifics them by ex-
ultingly shouting his sons of triumph over
the misguided English Directors, repeat
ing again and again, :" Richmond has only
turned over its capital once, the Eureka
has done it % times" The paon Of Bay
liss thus ~cclipses the song of Miriam, whose
more modest record only wen as far as
Saul has slain his thousands, David his
tens Ct thousands"
Mr.. Bayliss having % delivered his
illustrative lesson to the Richmond will,
perhaps, be induced to continue it for the
beneti. of the Eureka, and remind them Of
the further fact that, whereas they have
only returned their capital 25 times, the
Coinstnck has repaid its original purchase
80, 200 times. Mr.. Bayliss has, no doubt,
a fist full of figures, but be has assuredly
not grasped their meaning. He objects to
its being supposed that he has selected UNI
fair periods for comparison but in his
letter Of July 8 he takes 1867, when we
had exceptionally poor ore, needing 8 tons
instead Of SIS to produce / ton of bullion,
and gives our then smelling cost as IS 18s.
per ton, as against f2 IS. for the Eureka,
concealing the fact that the Richmond
smelling outlay was reduced to e. IS. di-
rectly the same class of ores was reached
which enabled our neighbor to work with
such apparent economy; and despite the
further fact that Mr.. Hague in the ON
parison he makes at page 7 Of the report,
gives the average Of the mining and haul
ing costs Of the Eureka as 5000. and Of the
Richmond as 1913, a difference Of only 8
cents and he adds, 1t is due to the man
agement TO say that this item OF cost COM
pares fayorably with mining costs gener-
ally in this State under similar conditions"
The fair inference is that no such discrep-
ancy in fuel costs as Mr.. Bayliss dilates on
can have occurred except at periods when
the conditions were not alike. Then,
again, Mr.. Bayliss compares the dividends
paid by the Richmond for the nine months
from August 81. 1877, to May 81, 1875
$50, 749, with the f2T0,0D0 paid by the
Eureka from the ore distracted from our
ground. copccaling the fact that though
only Gee, 743 had been paid, the Richmond
had at the date he quotes El3J. 900 more
in hand, of which els goo has since been
given to the shareholders.
Mr.. Bayliss taunts the Richmond with
having only spcnt one-tenth" the mount
expended by the Eureka in explorations,
aud when l pointed out that by this one
tenth Of tie cost we had raised ore to the
valne of 81, 79t 1855, whereas the Eureka,
with IS months longer time to work in,
had only produced ore to the value Of
81 ,G21 las. Mr.. Bayliss cvades the ques-
ton as to which company had acted best in
its dcad-work outlay by cooliy attributing
to me the idea that the limited explorations
were "a striking testimony to the judg-
ment and enterprise Of the Richmond
Board l need only adduce as q further
proof Of Mr.. Bayliss' qualifications for the
task Of corrector OF Richmond blunders,
the contemptuous reputation he has given
to Mr.. Hopkins calculations as to smelt-
ing costs, by informing him that to get at
the truth lie must first a deduct the fluxing
ores and fine dust, and then divide by the
number Of tons OF Richmond ore smel.ed."
In my innocence / had supposed that fue
dust was Richmond ore, and that pur-
chased ores. whether for fiuxing or not, had
to be smeltcd at some expenditure FOL fuel.
Mr.. Dayliss announces the discovery he
has made that it would be as rational to
add the weight of the fuel itself, and every
defender of the past management Of the
Richmond must certainly be henceforth
struck dumb with establishment.