Eureka daily sentinel. [volume] (Eureka, Nev.) 1871-1887, 1880-06-13

A Member Of the Visiting Commit.
toe Sill Growing.

IVA 46O " - ~ tAAo QAu
Of the line. The Commission came out
prejudiced against the management, and
prepared to find fault with everything and
everybody. How Manager Probert upset
all Of the statements made to the share
holders on the return Of the Commission
is still fresh in the minds Of our local
readers.
1t appears that Mr.. Brereton is still dis
satisfied. He doubtless imagines himself
competent to conduct the affairs Of the
Company in better shape. 1t was limited
here at the time of his visit that he hoped
to succeed to the Superintendency Of the
property.
The last Mining Journal to hand con
tains q criticism from the would-be Super
intendent regarding last years yield Of the
Richmond. He twists the figures and re-
suits in a way to show that the Richmond
has not earned for the shareholders what
it should have earned. He has nothing to
say of the fire by which the reduction
works OF the Company were destroyed,
and other adverse happenings for the year.
But his growl nevertheless possesses q de-
gree OF local interest. It ID as follows:
The shareholders Of this Company have
been wonderfully favored by Nature in the
wealth Of ore in the mine, and they are in
vited to rest well content with the receipt
of unwonted dividends.
The working results of the past year give
q net profit Of f134, SIC on the smelling of
39,051 tons Of Richmond ores, 1870 tons
Of purchase or iuxing ores, and 29s tons
of fue-dust or debris, or Q gross total Of
$3.50 tons. The net profit is, therefore,
about f2 lis. I'd. per gross ton Of ore.
The published smelling tabular state
ment gives the base bullion product Of the
ore in gold, silver and lead; but it does not
give the average quantity Of these metals
in the $3.50 tons Of ore previous to smelt-
ing. 1t shows the aggregate average (Eu-
reka standard) assay value Of the ores TO
be 500 &c.. or f12 81. cd. per ton, and the
yield, on the same standard value, at $55 SO,
or ELL Is. 4d. per ton, which represents q
loss Of FL 8s. 3D., or III per cent. in
smelling.
The yield Of base bullion was 9,436 tons
from the $3.50 tons Of ore, or 81 to /.
The average value Of the ton OF bullion
would, therefore, be $304 81, or EGO ITS.
3D.. The mining expenses are $11 OF, or
e. As. per ton Of ore, as against $11 88, or
e. Is. Cd. in 1S7s-79, and SO 70, or ca 3s.
in 1877-78. The cost Of mining per ton OF
base bullion is. therefore, $50 81, or f12
Is. Sd.
The smelling expenses are given as 1885,
$780,, or f2 lis. I'd. per ton on the 81, $40
tons reduced. To this amount should be
added the cost Of the 1859 tons of luxing
orao haoanoo kba Nb.;-no, - Az ~1~.-1
meeting on June Z, 1879, stated as follows:
The object of our buying these ores is,of
course, as you know, that it is an advan-
tage to purchase them, as they furnish a
fux and mix well with our ores, and there
by helping the smelling, and that is the
only object we have in purchasing the
Ores" The cost Of these 49, 1863 tons of
fiuxing ores is shown in the accounts mo.
% to be ESQ, 261, or "a lis. Cd. per ton.
Adding this sum to the cost Of smelling the
total cost is f195, 1857, or f3 los. per ton Of
ore, and EGO 12s. I'D. per ton Of base bull
lion. The similar smelling costs were "a
per ton Of ore in 1889, and f5 Is. I'd. in
1s77-7s.
The cost per ton OF refining, marketing,
and transportation Of bullion can not be ac-
curately arrived at, because the actual tom
mage is moi shown in the accounts. 1t ap-
pears, however, there were ALTO tons Of
bullion, or gold, silver, and lead thereof,
marketed, at q cost Of f51 1894, or ELL per
ton. Adding this to the given cost of re-
fning, SIC 28, or Is 5s per ton, the total
cost may be assumed to be about ETA 5s
per ton. The total cost Of mining, smelt-
ing, refining, and marketing will be per ton
of base bullion $235, or EAT.
The tabular smelling and refining state
ment does not show the losses in metals in
refining the base bullion-which in gold is
not q small item.
The dividends paid have amounted to
ESQ. zoo. and the directors propose to pay
immediately o further sum Of ear, 600,
making in all EST, 750, which il equivalent
c 13s. Cd. per ton Of ore, or go 4s. per ton
Of bullion, or IS per cent. Of the assay
value Of the ore. and 10 per cent. Of the
value Of the bullion.
1t will be interesting and instructive to
compare the foregoing results OF the Rich
mond workings with those Of our neigh
Dor, the Eureka Consolidated, who have
mined and smelted ores of q similar value.
This company has mined during the past
year, as shown in the last official report,
SO, 1884 tons Of ore, and smelted 60, 244
tons. The costs Of mining and hauling
ores to the furnaces were $40 or FL. g..
4d. per ton, which Ia los. Sd. less than the
Richmond. The SO, 244 tons Of ore yielded
13,452 tons Of base bullion, tho proportion
Of ore to bullion being 5.078 tons to one
nearly the same as the Richmond. The
total smelling expenses were $11 .07, Oh "a
As. Sd. per ton Of ore, which ia FL los. Sd.
less than the Richmond. The total trans
portation, marketing, and refining costs
were 1854. or ELS lbs. I'd. per ton Of base
h,x11tan wha total aAoto ~ -.srt,o ar.alk
ing, marketing. and refining per tom Of
base bullion were, therefore, $3.50. as, or
f32 1s.. which In at the rate Of S31 80. or
46 10. 4d.per ton Of ore. This IL about SIS.
or ELS per ton Of base bullion cheaper
working than the Richmond.
The dividends paid during the financial
year amounted to f220, 600 or &S AZ. Cd.
per ton Of ore. or f18 60. per ton Of bull
lion, and "a 81. per share. These divi-
dends we're paid monthly, and have been
continued. The company has also paid
$4,000 for the adjoining K. K. mine.
II the 2,519 tons Of Richmond ores had
been mined, smelted, refined and marketed
on the Eureka Company's more economi-
cal system, ! take 1t that the net profits
would have been nearly 927o,0 900 instead
Of f184.517. The Richmond shareholders
might then have obtained "a per share in
stead Of 81 las. 3D., because the difference
in the cost Of working being about 215 per
ton Of bullion, the 9,430 tons would have
yielded 414l $40. or 4212s. more per share.
Taking the saving In the two ttems. min
ing and smelling alone, the difference
amounts to Ella Sc. per ton OF bullion.
have made the foregoing deductions
from the Official reports Of the respective
companies, a. furnished to the sharehold-
ere, and my only object is to show that
there is still q wide scope for better man
agement 10 working the Richmond ores.
The Eureka C~ompany's shares have
ranged from IS to "a In the San Francisco
market during the past year, and are now
quoted at "a per share.
1 am not in the slightest degree interest
ed In the " bearing" or "bulling', opera