Gilpin observer., 1910-03-03
PROFITS IN MINING.

FHOfIIS IN MINING.
This side Of the subject of mining
Is not often discussed even in So
called exclusive mining journals. 1t
Is the one thing most desired by in
vestors. Technically it is a PROPOSE
tion of flint-like hardness to discuss
with any reasonable degree of salts
faction resulting to writer or reader
Thb is so for the simple reason that
while one operator may have taken
a fortune from the rocks, the new
management has only a long face to
show for his part in the operation of
the mine. The party of the first part
did we'll enough, claiming that when
he sold he received such and such
a figure and that may have been all
profit. But nothing is said as to
the worth of the mine as a money
maker. 1t is all right to say that
$50. 0.00o-nay, half a million was TAX
en- out. When? In what length of
time? Prove it. Why, look at these
sampler returns! Yes, all this is ad-
mitted. But what did it cost to pro-
duce that much ore? What is your
profit?
How many companies are paying
dividends compared with the number
OF companies that are not? All know
that immense values in gold, silver,
copper and lead are annually produc-
ed and swallowed in commerce. Who
get the benefit of all this?
A man or company has been known
to produce from mine as much as
million dollars, yet the property
never paid a dividend. Now the
world is richer by that million, but
the man or company has no profit
to show for this great output of
wealth. 1t is singular. Where has the
profit gomez The mine has been work
ing for years, not at q loss-it is
making running expenses, hence it
is able to continue. But think for a
minute. One year it produced a mil
| lion dollars. That is, the values in
the ore amounted to that figure and
the world is million dollars the
richer by that one mines product, ,and
yet none of the money has stuck to
the fingers of the mine operator.
Mining is too hard work to call it
benevolent action in giving the world
all this very tangible metallic SUBJ
stance called wealth. View the mat
ter as one will, the profit of mining
would seem to be assimilated by the
public-not alone the profit, the bulk
Of it-nay, all of it.
So, the man with a mine turning
| out thousands of dollars annually and
just making expenses, in the course
Of time may output a vast fortune.
Yet the owner cannot say he pos
sesses a 1.-THE of what was produced.
Yet the wealth extracted from the
mine has been absorbed by the arts
and commerce and the mine owner
no richer than when he began.
But this may be making a mountain
out Of a mole-hill.The Profit is where
surplus remains. II there is no sur
plus. why. then, of course no money
is being made. and that is patent.
But the argument Of production re-
mains-the mine has produced mil
lion-but who benefited by this in
crease to the worlds wealth?
Equipment, labor, sampler charges.
railroads, smelter, ETC.. all received
profit. Their profit was all above
expense account Without these aids
the mine cannot produce. These are
the beneficiaries, while the mine op-
orator unless he is Tabor or n
Walsh must rest content with Just
expenses, which. everyone knows, is
not profit. by any means.
But the unique position is that the
product of the mine will remain in
definitely a thing OF value long after
its producer or the man who mined
it has long gone the way OF all flesh.