Weekly journal-miner. [volume] (Prescott, Ariz.) 1908-1929, 1913-04-02

value of the mine was primarily
based upon its annual product or
profit after it had been equipped.
Mr.. Hoover, in his book on "Prin-
ciples of Mining" gave a concrete
example, in which the present value
of certain mine, if equipped, was
approximately 100000, but mas
much as it would take 100000 to
build this equipment that the pres
ent value of the mine, unequipped,
was only 100000. In answer to
the question propounded him, as to
how he would make this agree with
the basic law of the state, which in
sists that improvements on a mine
must be taxed, Mr.. Claiming stated
that if, by the proper calculation of
net or gross, or both, it was arrived
at that the value of an equipped
producing property was, say $780,
600, and that its plant was worth
$4,000 that then the assessment
on the property could be spread
upon the rolls in two parts, one
setting forth the value of-the mine
alone as $4,5OO,0OO, and the other
setting forth the value of its i'm
provements at $4,000.
Regarding smelters which did GUS
tom work in addition to smelling
the regular ore of their mine, Mr..
Claiming thought there would be
no difficulty in making an additional
assessment of the certain portion of
the smelter in the same ratio that
the custom ore bore to the regular
mine ore, and that of course in the
case of smelters doing strictly Gus
tom work, the whole value of the
smelter would be assessed at a fair
price
Referring to the total assessment
of the Michigan copper mines, Mr..
Claiming called attention to two
facts, which would tend to make the
Michigan assessment OF its copper
mines proportionately higher than
those OF the mines of Arizona.
The first was that Mr.. Finlay had
assumed a rate of income to the
investors of only S per cent, and
that while that might satisfy the
Boston holders of Lake Superior
copper stocks, it never would satisfy
nor be fair to the mines of Arizona,
where certainly nothing less than
10 per cent rate would be ade- !
quate to interest capital. Mr.. Chan
ming showed that according to Mr..
Hoover's tables, the present value
OF mines share, paying Sl0O
per year OF a mine with twenty
years life, on a 5 per cent basis,
would be worth $1196, whereas on
a 10 per cent basis it would be
worth only $40 In addition to
this, Mr.. Claiming called attention
TO the fact that certain of the Lake
Superior copper mines included in
their assets, not only railways, but
steamships on the Great Lakes, and
III addition TO this, enormous hold
ings of timber lands, and that these
made very material increase in the
gross valuation OF these properties.
Following out his argument that it
was unfair to specifically add to the
values of the mines the cost of
their reduction works, Mr.. Chan
ming pointed out that in the case
Of the low grade properties, the
lower the grade the more money
had TO be spent in reduction works,
because 1t was necessary to treat
arger tonnage of ore per day in
order to make a commercial sue
,ess.
Mr.. Claiming also pointed out a
hat the engineers who had planned t
he operation of the large low grade {
'orphyry were absolutely under the
necessity of proving up large ton S
lage before they could interest the
necessary capital to equip the prop
rites. That a mine like the Ray,
Miami or Inspiration, could not pos
IDLY be operated at a profit, if l
reating only 1000 tons per day, and Il
hat therefore they were under the b
ecessity of making this large initial Z
before a single pound G
f copper was produced. a
Still further, in regard to the O
oint of not adding to the assess t
lent of mine the value of its i'm il
rovements, he called attention to i,
he fact that if certain of the prop 1
rites, at present not smelling their
wn concentrates, should put in a il
Ill.