The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1897-04-21
PHOSPHATE ROYALTY.
A DELAYED LETTER FROM CAPTAIN
FRANK E. TAYLOR.
He Argues for Certain Relief II the Com.
panies are to Continue In Business-The
Coosaw Company Going Out.

He Argues for Certain Relief II the Com.
panies are to Continue in Business-The
Ooosaw Company Going Out.
COLUMBIA, April 16.-In the Char
lesion correspondence of The Register
yesterday was an interview with Cap
tain Frank E. Taylor in regard to the
phosphate interests, in which he said
he had written Gov. Ellerbe his views
and that he would not give out the
contents unless the Governor did. The
Governor yesterday gave it to the
newspaper men, saying that although
it had been written before the Beau
fort trip, still he had not received it.
The letter follows:
Charleston. S. G., March 80, 1897.
Hon. w. 81. Ellerbe, Chairman Board
of Phosphate Commissioners, Co
lumbia. s. @.
Dear Sir: On the brief notice exten-
ded to me it was impossible for me to
make any arrangements to leave the
city, as I had matters of great import
ance at home which demanded my at
tention. I therefore, at the last mo-
ment, wired Inspector Jones at Ye'
massee that I could not join the par
lty, and wrote him, confirming my
telegram, stating that would COM
municate with you.
The petition, under date March 3,
signed by the Coosaw Mining Com
pany and other companies, addressed
to yourself and the members of the
board, has had my earnest considera-
ton. I have given the matter much
thought and, as far as am concerned,
have reached a definite conclusion,
which conclusion I will as briefly as
possible state in this communication.
First. I am in favor, in view of the
depressed condition of the phosphate
interests, resulting from the develop
ment of the phosphate industry in
other States, of extending such relief
as would bs just and equitable and at
the same time work no hardship to
the State.
Second. I am of the opinion that a
royalty of 25 cents per ton is reasona-
BILE. and that the increase in said roy.
atty should commence at a figure not
certainly higher than So per ton.
Third. I am of the opinion that
whatever royalty may be decided up.
on should be fixed for period of not
less than two years.
Fourth. I have reached the definite
conclusion, in regard to the 5000
Itons or more of rock on hand, say
about as follows: The Coosaw Com.
pany 80, 900 tons, the Farmers Mining
Company Il, 1000 tons, the Beaufort
Company 5000 tons, that the State ia
entitled to a royalty of so cents per
ton upon this surplus product, which,
at so cents per ton on $4,000 tons,
amounts to 1924. 500, for which said
amount the State has lien upon said
rock. I think, therefore, that the
State should collect the so cents per
ton royalty upon this $4,000 tons OF
rock, but obligate and agree that al;
the expiration of twelve months from
the date of the action of the board, il
these each minded an equivalent
Quantity of rock to that which they
now have on hand, then the State,
will rebate to them 25 cents per ton Of
the so cents per ton collected, and will
charge 25 cents per ton royalty upon
the equivalent quantity that will be
mined during the time, viz: one year
from the date of the action of the
board.
By pursuing this course the State
| will be assured of its $24, 500, which is
the equivalent of so cents par ton on
49, 900 tons of rock. 1t will not do to
argue that because plants are valuable
they are, therefore, going to be run.
This is simply business question that
is presented to US. No matter how
sincerely we may sympathize with the
PROSTATE condition of the phosphate
Industry, there is no just reason, to
my mind, why the commissioners
should be at all philanthropic, and ]
take it that it is not the inte ntion OF
the mining companies to have the
board consider the question in any
other than a business way.
To illustrate: The Coosaw Company
has 10000 tons of rock on hand. 1t
pays royalty of $4,000. At the ex-
piration of the year it shows that it
has mined 10000 tons additional. II
receives back from the State 81, 500,
and is liable for 25 cents per ton roy
atty on the 10000 tons mined during
this year. Suppose, for instance, that
the Coosaw Company mined only 90
900 tons then it would receive back rs
cents per ton royalty on 30, 900 tons
and would be liable to pay 25 cents
per ton on 10000 tons mined.
do not see why the State should
take any chances of any one of these
companies shutting down. If the
plants are so valuable and the compa,
nies do not intend to shut down, then,
under the proposition 1 present, they
will be perfectly assured that they
| will get this rebate of 25 cents pei
ton. If, on the other hand, any one
company has no intention of going on
and makes up its mind to shut down,
or produce a very small quantity OIL
rock, then the State of South Caroline
| will have simply lost so much royalty
| if they make the reduction in royalty
| without agreement suggested by me.
| There is no quid pro quo or take it in
its last analysis. Suppose all the com
lpanies should shut down and produce
lno rock this year. The State would
lsimply bs out $l2, ,25O on 1000 tons
of rock. if they made a reduction ol
I25 cents par ton without binding the
companies to an equivalent further
production.
1t seems to me, therefore, under the