The Calumet news. [volume] (Calumet, Mich.) 1907-1938, 1911-02-14
Gas Fair a Plan As Gould be Pro-
duced Under Existing Con-
ditions," Says Brokers'
Committee
PROPOSES A HOLDING COMPANY
Suggests Such an Organization to c.
G. n. to Eliminate All Opposition
to the Merger as II is Now
Proposed.
Courtesy of ]. A. Mlnnear & Coz

Boston, Mass, Feb. 14.-(SpeciaD.-
The report of the Boston Stock Ex-
change committee on the Calumet &
Hecla merger is as follows:
ITO the members of the Boston Ex-
change:
committee there should be very clear
understanding in your minds as Ia
what we were asked to do. The vote
under which we acted instructed us to
consider the terms offered by the G. &
II. company to stockholders of the
other companies, and to report at a
subsequent meeting whether or not
those terms appeared to be equitable
and if not, what further action should
be taken for the best interests OF our
clients who are interested in these
companies. We were not placed in the
position of representing stockholders
for the purpose of making any trade,
nor invited by the various interests to
suggest any plan or any modification
of the present plan. We were simply
asked to consider If under all the con-
ditions of the present plan appeared
equitable. If on behalf of the so-called
minority interests, we had been ap-
pointed a committee to assist in the
making of some plan, we might have
pursued the matter i'm a different way.
"Since the committee was appoint
ed January 18th, we have given prac-
tically continuous study TO the pros
posed plan. Many hearings have been
held at the office of the c. & H. COM
pany, where the officials have spared
no pains to furnish us with all the
Information in their possession, which
appeared most complete in all its de-
tails. They have placed at the dis
posal of our experts all maps and
figures.
Your committee have viewed the
correspondence with Mr.. ]. Parke
Claiming, as well as that from Mr..
the Ahmeek who has since resigned
and is now reported as opposed to the
plan We employed Prof. Alfred c.
Lane, for many years state geologist
of Michigan. with wide reputation
as a geologist, although with no prac-
teal experience as an operator We
have employed experts to study GER
tain figures given to us, both as to
cost of production and as to account
ing. We have also had legal advice.
The estimates of the future values
as given by Mr.. MacNaughton. have
received careful consideration. Your
committee certainly cannot question
the intelligence of Mr.. MacNaughton
and Mr.. Claiming, nor of q various
officials of the company an as to
their veracity II certainly Is beyond
us to question that. 1t is not in our
province to express an opinion as to
whether this is proper time OF
bringing about this consolidation, but
only to consider the question as to
whether, under given conditions. the
plan Is fair to the various interests.
II is quite possible that some of the
unproductive properties might appear
to he over-valued relatively. and some
of the producers might fare rather
better under favorable conditions as
Independent properties for a period of
1T should be clearly understood
that this plan is dealing on the one
hand with one large low cost producer
and on the other hand with eleven
comparatively high cost producers
For the purpose of determining the
relative values the average future
price of copper was estimated at 1S
1-2 cents. 1t will readily be seen that
II higher price were used the eleven
companies would show a much greater
relative value than the one. On the
other hand, is a lower price, the re-
verse would be true.
We have, therefore, given serious
consideration to the possible price of
copper for the next ten years. and we
suits from the standpoint of what
would happen to the various interests
II there were no consolidation. On the
other hand we have weighed against
that the probable advantages to be
gained in stability of both investment
and income II seems TO be n ques-
ton for individual opinion. as whether
stakeholder should yield the one for
the other. One thing left to be done.
and that we have not been authorized
TO do. would be to employ an expert
TO visit the properties. Whereas that
might seem desirable. we see no OBJ
ject in doing so, unless you wish to
question the good faith of the engin-
eers already employed.
We believe that under the condi-
uons' that the intrinsic worth of the
combined companies will be greater