The Ordway new era., 1908-11-27
The OTHER SIDE Of THE
SMELLING PROBLEM
The GENERAL MANAGER OF Tue
SMELLING COMPANY AN.
swERs RECENT CRITICISMS

ourihg the recent political campalpn
.he Denver Post made the American
"'hei'ihg d Refining Company its mar.
amount issue" That qualification, hoe
peeh criticizing the company since the
election and on Nov. Sth published a
iohe statement against the conduct of
mat company toward Colorados min.
ing Industry. Franklin GuIterman CON
e."' SUPERINTENDENT of the company for
ooiorado, has written the following
answer, which We reproduce in ordor
llat our readers may understand ho,b
sIdes OF this controversy:
Denver Colo. Nov. .. l9OS.-iro
me Denver PosD-In the article of
Gen. Frank Hall in the Post of Nov
we nave at last something tangible to
ucai with. to which such brief answer
can be made as may be of interest IN
'he public. For the first time we have
an admission that the statements made
ny the Post during the recent political
campaign were not true.
Gen. Hall prrfaccs his article bv
me declaration that an attempt should
be made TO bring about more satis(ac
tory relations between the smelling
company and its patrons. The smelt
ing company is not and has not been
aware OF the existence of any such
friction as is claimed by the Post If
II were so, would the calculated dis
semination of untruths by that paper
tend to bring about better feeling?
Gen. Hall says that the financial
CONFUSION beginning in October. 1907,
well nigh paralyzed the mining dis.
tricts. This is true statement. but
was the American Smelling & Refining
Company responsible for such unfortu-
nate conditions?
Why should the discomfort (D
which followed the panic have found
expression In furious diatribes against
the smeltcr II such state of feeling
were not fost"red by those who had
their own private ends to serve In ere.
a,ing such unjust sentiments?
IF Gen. Hall does not know It,. he
could easily have asccrtained that in
the dire situation which confronted the
Colorado ore producers. the smelling
company stepped right into the breach
by modifying the existing contracts In
favor of the producers as II had done
time and again previously. and still
further reduced treatment charges on
such other ores as could not be pro.
duced under previous terms, whether
under contract or not.
Gen. Hall correctly states some un-
just things were said and done. lie
might, in truth. have said n great
many, but where have we found any
correction of the unjust and slandcr.
Gus statements?
Gen. Hall says that II the capital
stock OF the company were reduced,
the producer of ore would receive bet
ter rates and conveys the impression
that these charges are extortionate be-
cause of the necessity for the continua,
ton of dividends on closed plants. Can
Gen Hall point TO a single instance
where treatment charges have been
raised on account of the closure of any
plant In Colorado, which Is practically
] lUe OHIS Iltlu sihN''''S h"'
been closed by the development of I'M
fortunate mining conditions?
Does not Gen. Hall know full well
that Notwithstanding the closure OF
number of plants of the American
Smelling & Refining Company in Colo
RADIO. smelling rates have been unin.
terruptedly reduced on all classes oil
those ores whose value. by reason of
falling metal prices. became so low as
to necessitate such assistance? IL he
does not, let him make inquiry OF the
representative mining men of Colorado
in all mining districts. The policy OF
the American Smelling & Refining
Company has been open, consistent
and helpful, and can stand the most
searching investigation and criticism
of all fair minded men.
"In the matter OF contracts, the ore
producers are and have been Tree
agents to make them or not. The sched-
ules are no different than they were
when the smelters were in open conf
petition. Can single instance be
given where a producer has been
forced to sign contract? II 1t is true
as has been repeatedly stated by Gen.
Hall, that competing smelters now OF,
for better rates than the American
Smelling & Refining Company on some
classes of ores, does this not prove
conclusively that the American Smelt,
inc g. Refining Company has no mon.
opoly, and that the ore producer is not
at a disadvantage?
"At Cripple Creek there are now Two
samn,,nr companies and they mutually
agreed upon sampling charges years
ago The American Smelling Il he-
rinInr Company has absolutely no con-
nection or interest in either concern.
Tn clear Creek, Gilpin and Boulder
counties there is only one concern 'he
Cbamberlain. Dillingham; Ore Company
! ~, r,,tber the American Smelt-