July 24, 2017 
 Monday 
 
 

Forum
Topic:
Correspondence from the President of OAU

       

Page 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4 | Page 5 | Page 6 | Page 7 | Page 8 | Page 9 | Page 10 | Page 11 ]

 By Michael Miller

01/02/2006  5:08PM

Thanks, guys. The test worked. CDAA told the judge that the web site tainted the jury pool. Now I have the proof if the defendants argue it again as the case continues. All is well in Alleghany. Electric power has been off since morning and not expected to return until after 7pm. It is always difficult to use the internet when the town has no power.
 By Michael Miller

12/05/2005  7:11PM

Late this day I received word that a decision was reached in our court case against the California District Attorneys Association and four of its lawyers. The news is good. As I sit down to read the Ruling On Motion To Strike, I decided to write you, the followers on our FORUM. We will learn together what the judge thought of Tom Knox’s position as I read the decision for the first time. Remember the company and Michael Miller are Plaintiffs. The bad guys, which it the shortest way we describe the fab four and their employer are the defendants. Lets read the decision together. It is four pages, so I will be editing it liberally. Oh, and by the way, I just poured myself a big scotch over the rocks to raise a glass to my friend, pal and social crusader, George, who I know is tapping these keys with me tonight.

This was filed in Downieville on December 1, 2005. It is signed by Stanley C. Young, Assigned Judge of the Superior Court. He writes, “The gravamen of the operative complaint in this matter is that the individual defendants acted maliciously and without lawful authority when they conspired to conceal exculpatory evidence from the grand jury, leading to a felony indictment against plaintiffs. Defendants have moved to strike the whole third amended complaint pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16.

“Resolution of an anti-SLAPP motion requires the court to engage in a two-step process. First, the court decision whether the defendant has made a threshold showing that the challenged cause of action is one arising from protected activity. The moving defendant’s’ burden is to demonstrate that the act or acts of which defendant complains were taken in furtherance of the defendants’ right of petition or free speech under the United States or California Constitution in connection with a public issue. If the court finds such a showing has been made, it then determines whether the plaintiff has demonstrated a probability of prevailing on the claim. Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16 does not protect conduct that is illegal as a matter of law. The motion to strike is DENIED.”

The ruling goes on to say, “Moreover, even if defendants’ burden has been met, the Court is persuaded that Plaintiff has met its burden of making a prima facie showing regarding the merits of the case.”

We won. We won big. We won it all. Tom Knox and his defendants presented a scenario to the Court that in my opinion and the opinion of many others abuses the intent of the law. This anti-SLAPP law was written by then California legislator and now California Attorney General. Was it so poorly written and then ratified by both California houses of the legislature that Tom Knox and his defendants’ motion had any merit?

The score is five to zero. We will continue to win. We will set the record straight. We will recovery damages. Klaus is confident that the bad guys will appeal. Yawn, of course they will. But could there be a downside to their reckless legal behavior? I hope so. I hope the legal profession will strike down those lawyers who mislead the court. I hope other lawyers will disbar those lawyers who abuse America’s greatest social/cultural creation, our judicial branch of government. The small guys’ ability to seek justice must survive. It is a long and bumpy road when the destination is to stop perjury in the courtroom. Even so, we just moved a little farther down the road. Tomorrow I will ask Kyle to type the whole decision. Oh, no. My glass is empty.
 By Michael Miller

11/30/2005  4:04PM

Article can be read in FORUM under Gold Enters Bull Market September 21,2005

Pierre Lassonde, President
Newmont Mining
Denver Co

Dear Mr. Lassonde,

Congratulations on your story, “The Gold Constant”, printed in Mining Engineering. You packed a lot of history into it yet made it palatable to people outside the gold industry. I particularly liked your analysis on the saving rate. It was fresh.

I write for two reasons. First, I ask your permission to put your story on our web site. The company treats its web site as a library for people familiar and unfamiliar with the topic of gold. It is not set up to hype stock, but to be an intellectual resource. Interestingly, Fred Searles played an important role in Newmont and the Sixteen to One. We have another odd twist between our respective companies taking place at the Empire Mine State Park, where I am currently driving an adit to intersect the Empire shaft. Also, we both are rare in the industry as leaders in our particular fields because we are incorporated in the United States. Newmont is the largest and Original Sixteen to One Mine is the oldest. Well, enough of this.

Second, I want to extend an invitation to visit us in Alleghany and tour the mine. It would be an honor to show you around. Jack Thompson stopped by just before the Homestake merger for a tour. He seemed to enjoy the visit, as I know you will.

Hope to hear from you.


Regards,


Michael Meister Miller, President



P.S.
I’m not the gold con man Michael Miller from years gone by.
 By Michael Miller

11/16/2005  6:48PM

Dear Shareholders, Friends, Supporters and merely interested Readers,

The defendants’ Motion to Change Venue was denied today in Superior Court in Downieville. Judge Stanley Young did not agree that the CDAA and its employee lawyers could not get a fair trial in Sierra County. He agreed with us. The remaining order of business was final arguments for defendants’ anti SLAPP motion. Defendants claim that their constitutional rights were contested because Original Sixteen to One Mine, Inc sued them to recover damages it suffered related to their filing felony charges against the corporation. Personally, I think this motion is specious and contrary to the legislative intent. When the law to reduce or eliminate frivolous suits was enacted in California, lawyers, of course, “interpreted it according to their purposes. I despise people using the court for irresponsible or frivolous purposes! It is also despicable that the legal profession (many of our State Assemblymen and Senators are members of the State Bar) squander the peoples precious time and money arguing about stuff that should be straight forward..

The judge heard the bad guys lawyer, Thomas Knox, present his view of the case. Mr. Knox offered nothing new. Our attorney, Klaus Kolb answered with a reading of George’s preparation. Klaus had to partially summarized George’s writing due to time constraints. Klaus then proceeded to answer all of Judge Young’s questions as they were raised. He went into some constitutional points and pointed out enough evidence to show that our case has merit. Mr. Knox rebutted. The judge said the case has now been submitted and he will rule. Nothing that I heard today changes my mind that the anti SLAPP motion is nothing more than a routine legal move by insurance defense lawyers.

A transcript of the hearing will be posted on this web site once it is received. I want you to fully understand the case. Nothing will tell the story clearer than actual transcripts. The Court left open the opportunity for the defendants to raise the venue issue, as the case gets closer to a trial. He cautioned my use of the web site (no purpose to inflame or prejudice the Sierra County jury pool). He also specifically mentioned the local small mountain paper as a potential corrupting vehicle to tamper with the jury pool. While I do not have any control over Donald Russell and what he writes in his paper, it would be a monumental task for defendants to concoct a theory that either of us poisoned Sierra County against the CDAA gang, thereby threatening them of getting a fair trial. Nevertheless, I will be very careful in keeping you informed, as I must and restricting my commentary.

As I was returning from the Court, I passed by the site of George’s accident. It is because of George and the noble beliefs that he held for his profession, “lawyering “, the law and the Courts that we are still in the fight. George was present today in Downieville. He fought back the attempts of Tom Knox to mislead the Court . Klaus gave George the recognition for his brilliant pursuit of justice and I just sat there at one point close to tears (nobody noticed the little beads of water in the corners of my eyes). This case is more than a judicial abuse against our company. It smacks the essence of what we are as Americans. We will win.
 By Michael Miller

10/21/2005  2:08PM

In the summer of 1959, R.K. Barcus and C.W. McClung conducted an examination of the Sixteen to One mine for the Mountain Copper Company (contact for Mountain Copper was Mr. Kett). Mr. Barcus wrote the report and Mr. McClung wrote the recommendations and conclusions. Additional information contained in the report is available upon request and will be typed into the web site.

The following is relevant today. The company has begun a search for working capital to explore into areas remote from the present workings and other areas. It has opened a dialogue with six separate parties that have expressed an interest and appear to have the capital to fund the $3.5 million projects. A common question has arisen: “With the slow down in production has the mine been depleted?” This is a fair question. The answer is, “No” but for one unfamiliar with the gold deposit in Alleghany, the answer does not jump out to you easily. The person or persons who join our effort will be the ones who take the time to visit the mine and study the wealth of research available from third parties. My job is to hone the many reports into a short crash course. So, here goes. Excerpts from the report.


“Mine"
The mine is more or less what one might expect from fifty years of ‘ following the vein’ where there has never been pressure for a high, efficient rate of production. Under these circumstances, a mining scheme based on a much larger tonnage of production could not be undertaken without very extensive realignment and re- equipment of haulage and hoisting facilities.
With respect to ore reserves, in the commonly accepted sense the mine has none at all. However, it will be understood from a study of the General References that this has always been more or less the case. The total value in an ore shoot is never known until it is mined out, and development around the perimeter of a shoot gives only a very general idea of its content. In past years of stable operation, there was evidently an understanding between mine management and directors that annual production would not exceed a certain maximum, and that a large ore shoot would be mined only to the extent necessary to met this maximum. As a result, it has not been uncommon for 50% of a year’s output of gold to be made in November and December.
The single large need of this mine is for a new high-grade ore, and the answer to this need is equally simple: a substantial expenditure for exploration.

For 22 years from 1932 to and including 1953, and excluding the disastrous years since, we find the following totals:

1. Gold recovered $7,677,200
2. Net operating profit $2,837,039
3. Net after taxes $2,371,348
4. Dividends $2,583,471

It will be seen at once that both from an operating and a stockholders viewpoint the enterprise was a successful one during that period.

Bill Fuller and I spent considerable time in discussion of this situation. He discussed all phases of the operation with me freely and without restraint. He is intelligent and quick-witted, and intimately familiar not only with the mine geology but with the personnel and operating problems as well. While much of what he told me is admittedly in the realm of personal opinion, I am convinced these opinions are more reliable than any other source available.
The preceding discussion of the management has been included to emphasize that the real merit and potential of the mine itself must be considered separately from recent results achieved by the present operators. As stated earlier, I feel that many of the problems here are man-made.
A very serious consequence of the salary policy for supervisors is its psychological effect upon the men who are charged with the actual discovery of the gold underground. Since the entire exploration system is based on the detection of free gold in the rock as a key to near-by high-grade shoots, an attitude of indifference or of deliberate malice on the part of the Shift Boss or Specimen Bosses could result in the over-looking of signs that might lead to an ore shoot that could save the mine. The temptation to high-grade, or to condone it, would also be increased by a feeling of injustice brought by low pay.
Whether a depressed mine can afford to maintain competitive rates of pay may be an arguable point. My personal feeling is that a mine with the problems of the Sixteen-to-One cannot afford less than the best.






SIXTEEN-TO-ONE

RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

The Sixteen to One Mine is recommended for acquisition in part by Mountain Copper provided that the terms are the same or similar to these that follow: We do not recommend purchase as a whole as it is our understanding the mine is not for sale and further more, if negotiations for outright purchase were undertaken, we feel that it would not be possible to reach terms acceptable to us.
Basically, our proposal for reviving the Sixteen to One Mine is to have the present mine provide the funds for the major share of the cost of exploring and developing a new mine. This would be accomplished by doing first, limited renovation of under ground workings, surface plant and mill and then systematically stripping the mine of possible ore shoots (second guesses), shaft and stope pillars and drift sills and crown pillars. It is assumed that this program which cannot be evaluated by conventional means would provide the money from short range operating profits needed for the extensive exploration and development which must be done if the Sixteen to One Mine is again to become a long-lived profitable mine.
Initial cost of this proposal is estimated to be $ 350,000. Of this, $150,00 will be used for renovation and new equipment. Of the remaining $ 200,000 would be working capital to assure successful establishment of the overall program.
Joint participation between Mountain Copper and the present owners of the Sixteen to One Mine is recommended on these broad terms: Mountain Copper to have full operating control, Sixteen to One to be responsible for the cost of renovation and both partners to share equally the remaining costs. There must be a complete understanding that operating profits from the first phase would be put into exploration. Distribution of ultimate profits would be subject to negotiation.
Historically, the mine has made in excess of a quarter million dollars profit a year excluding the recent past few years during which the operation has been run at a loss or at best a break-even point. However, during this most period, no attempt has yet been made to plunder the mine. Operations have been conducted on ‘second guesses’ at a very slow and inefficient rate. Good mining was practiced in the past particularly in respect to proper support of underground openings. Adequate pillars protect the shafts and drifts and most stopes remain open.
There is reasonable assurance that with maximum effort to restore moderate efficiency to the mine and with systematic plundering to abandon completely the existing underground workings above the 100 level from the north boundary to the Sixteen to One Mine shaft that operating profit of $400,000 to $500,000 can be generated at an annual rate of $100,000 to $150,000. This sum reinvested in the mine would do the entire Medium Range exploration program proposed in Mr. Barcus’ report. An annual extraction of 30,000 tons of $15 ore would be required to produce the above profits. Remaining capacity of the renovated mill would be used to handle rock from exploration and development.
Willingness on the part of the Sixteen to One people to accept this proposal or a modification therefore would demonstrate their faith in the mine and the sincerity of the management’s statements upon which many of our assumptions are based. Mountain Copper’ investments of cash into this venture would be a minimum with a risk commensurate with the possible gain.
The excellent comprehensive report by Mr. Barcus gives as clear a picture of the Sixteen to One Mine as is possible from available data. The report covers in detail the complex facets that make up this unique property and it also shows why a recommendation is not possible based upon the usual form of mine evaluation whereby money is spent first on exploration and development and secondly, on a mill and surface buildings.
If the policy of Mountain Copper is to reenter gold mining at this time, the Sixteen to One offers an excellent opportunity for risk capital. The risk is not easily evaluated because ore cannot be measured by ordinary standards, hence, a great stress must be placed upon historical evidence, geological reasoning, a feeling for the mine and the integrity of certain of the present mine officials.
The present mine is dead, and we could not expect continuation of current operation to be profitable without managerial changes and extensive renovation. If this were a property of the usual order, consideration would be given only to the development of ore. But it is evident that the Sixteen to One is not an ordinary mine, and all phases of the operation, that is, surface plant, mill and underground must be examined and related to the overall problem of creating a new mine.
From the Barcus report, it will be seen that there are two major areas of immediate interest in the search for new ore. These are classified as ‘short range’ and ‘medium range’ exploration commonly referred to as ‘second guesses’ and ‘deep south’ respectively. Each offers a basic approach towards reviving the mine and either one could be done alone or both undertaken together, thus giving three basic options. In addition, there are several combinations of the three that could be coupled with various degrees of renovating the existing plant. The choice is dependent upon the amount of money to be spent, the ultimate goal and the time to factor involved. Costs of the basic options range from $380,000 to $500,000 with added sums to a maximum of $150,000 depending upon the degree of plant renovation. Exploration and development costs taken from the Barcus report are based upon those of an operating mine and sizable increase could be expected if the programs were undertaken independently.
Determination of the course of action to follow at the Sixteen to One must consider the nature of the ore. It can be linked to a low calorie pudding, which contains a few extremely rich but small plums. A conventional program of sinking, drifting and rising for thorough and complete exploration and development of an ore body is fundamentally the system of mining at the Sixteen to One. Exploration headings, especially raises that encounter. High-grade ore are simply enlarged into small stopes of sizes, which are not predictable. It is therefore impossible to block out quantities of known ore. Advanced exploration is considered as ore reserves and the milling of exploration and development ore is the best means of determining its value.
A moderate exploration program following any of the three basic options would produce approximately 60 tons of ore a day. The existing mill with minor and inexpensive repairs, would handle this tonnage easily. If either of the short range ‘second guesses’ begin producing or the medium range ‘deep south’ proves the existence of another geological environment similar to that which contains the ‘basic’ structure of high grade ore in the old mine area. It would be very difficult to decide when exploration ceases and mining begins. A reasonable number of headings could be stopped at a showing of high grade and exploration continued in other headings but it would be impossible to estimate reserves as there would be no way of knowing ultimate value of each high grade short of mining it out. Prudent management would dictate extraction of high grade about as it is found. Then it would be possible for the mine to become a profitable producer at any stage of the exploration program, limiting the amount of money that would otherwise be spent in continued exploration.
Exploration, based upon knowledge gained from past experience, would be channeled into the most favorable areas. By taking advantage of this hindsight, it should be possible to save much dead work and to confine our efforts to zones more likely to produce high-grade ore. Limiting nonessential exploration would reduce dilution of high-grade ore with low grade or barren quartz thus raising the overall value of ore mined. If the thesis developed in the Barcus report of high-grade ore being confined to a particular geological environment similar to the area above the 1000 level and between the Tightner and the Sixteen to One shafts is found to repeat, areas of this magnitude could be mined out in considerably less time than was done in the past. Rather than taking 16 years to produce 8 million dollars, the same amount could easily be produced in half the time. The yearly profit level would then be raised from one-quarter million to a figure substantially higher and much more attractive to partners of a joint venture.
The above is predicated upon a geological theory the proof of which depends on the success of the medium range or ‘deep south’ exploration program. If our proposal is accepted, Mountain Copper would be risking a minimum of $ 150,000 and the Sixteen to One Mine would be gambling a like amount, which they now have in their treasury, and their mine to prove or disapprove the existence of a new mine. It is the considered opinion of both the writer and Mr. Barcus this is a deserving venture.”


 By Michael Miller

09/29/2005  1:11PM

Dear FORUM Friends,

Gold became the unpublicized stability of international trade when the United Stated allowed the “price per ounce” to floated with all currencies; its value, however, has remained measured in dollars. Speculation contributes to its fluctuation, but some well-healed producers of other goods and services looking to hedge their earnings for the long term turned to gold.
The Middle Eastern oil producers have an extended history of exchanging their dollar revenues for gold. Some dabbled in other hard assets but stuck with gold. Other people, cultures and agencies were attracted to the staying power of gold but dabbled in other purchases with their stacks of dollars. The most publicized transactions occurred when the yen crowd was buying America: Rockefeller Center, Pebble Beach, and classic art. The all-rich desert cultures were comfortably secure with bullion bars in their possession even if they earned no interest.

Twenty-five years ago stories about the depleted vaults at Fort Knox were covering gold-bug publications. The subject is never discussed today. Did somebody clean out this most famous gold depository? If so, who could it be? Gold is the only physically pure storage of value. It has no natural enemies. No natural conditions erode its composition and mars is .9999 fineness. No water or fire will destroy it. It is the world’s most perfect substance to store. It is compact, easy to hide, or disguise. It is readily liquefied (changed into currency).

Unlike during the last gold rush of the twentieth century, which began in 1968 or 1974 (depends on ones historical perspective) China is a new world financial player. Her central bank thirsts for purchasers of mortgages from U.S. financial institutions to hedge the billion paper credits it has amassed. The surge in this demand is fueled with China’s over supply of dollars. China has liened much of America’s real estate. Maybe this is a good economic event, but few people are knowledgeable enough to give it a fair discussion.

Does gold make a difference today? I say, “America needs a productive gold industry”. Our deficit mounts, and our overall indebtedness to foreigners totals about $3 trillion. China is retaining its dollar in its central bank as demand swings to U.S. mortgage-backed securities. Other less noticeable entities are doing likewise.

This is troubling. Money streaming in from overseas is going toward consumption and housing. It is not helping to finance a boom in productive assets such as factories and machinery. America continues to be non-competitive with the labor markets outside of North America. Consider that the California gold fields offer America a way to work towards neutralizing the threatening trade deficit. California gold exists. California holds the world’s premier proven gold deposit with the fewest number of miners working their trade. In order to redirect a failing and vital economic opportunity to improve America’s security, let’s produce more gold locally. Gold mining as executed at the Sixteen to One mine is green as it is golden. It is also timely. The California high-grade goldfields offer prime production of a vital commodity and a potential yet to be realized. Twenty-first capitalists have ignored gold investments in rock solid mining propositions. With the technological improvement over the past ten years, any risk/reward analysis will tell a story worth hearing.

I remain committed to our goals.
Michael
 By Michael Miller

09/07/2005  1:21PM

TO the Securities Exchange Commission
Management’s Discussion and Analysis for June 30, 2005, 10-Q


Predicting gold production at the operating Sixteen to One mine in Alleghany, California is not a worthwhile endeavor. Terms such as “proven”, “probable”, “inferred”, or “measured” have no relevance in well-established, traditional gold deposits like the Alleghany Mining District. The company is the oldest American gold mining corporation and continues to produce gold into the twenty first century from a mine with no reserves. Terms used in most mining analysis of future or potential gold mean nothing as to the future or potential of gold remaining in the Sixteen to One mine. The company mines what its deposits contain, high-grade gold veins within a well-defined vein of quartz. The company is the world’s premier high-grade gold producer. It is not merely guess work that has allowed this to occur.

Because the gold in quartz is in demand as a precious gemstone, the Company is not as sensitive to the fluctuations in the spot price for bullion; however, revenues have increased over the past six months due to the increases in the spot price. Currently, the demand for Sixteen to One gold exceeds the supply. The price received for quartz with gold varies on the nature of the quartz and gold but is consistently three to four times the spot price. The Company also sells its own line of jewelry.

The Company has a small crew and is only working the Sixteen to One mine. It owns other past gold producers in the Alleghany Mining district as well as the Brown Bear mine in Trinity County, California. The Company has drafted plans for bringing each of its mines into production. The Company has announced its plans to construct a new shaft in the central area of its property. Construction is dependent on available capital for the expansion, estimated to be $3 million. The Directors have authorized its President to secure up to $3.5 million and to use the Brown bear mine or the Company’s gold collection to accomplish the funding.

The Company was financially crippled by uncontrollable events over the past six years, resulting in a serious lack of both working capital and growth capital. These events included: over aggressive State and Federal regulatory agencies, increased utility costs, increased workers compensation costs, a bear market for gold, which suppressed investors interest in a private placement of stock, and reckless accusations of criminal behavior associated with the tragic death of a miner by private attorneys. Currently, the atmosphere has greatly changed. The Company is actively seeking working capital to correct its financial shortcomings.

The Company has followed a traditional pattern of growth and development since the mine was discovered in 1896. By acquiring mines within the region, Original sixteen to One Mine, Inc. is the hub of the Alleghany Mining District. On June 22, 2005, the Company announced the acquisition of the mineral rights to fourteen claims, the patent rights to one claim and the mill of the Gold Crown mine, adjacent to the Sixteen to One mine. The Board of Directors decided that it is a long-term investment and important to the long-term welfare of the Company. There are limited plans to investigate and evaluate the new acquisition.
 By Michael Miller

08/27/2005  10:08AM

Greenhorn:

Yes, there are large gold mining firms. Yes, some might be interested. Yes, some do have the capital to fund the exploitation (I love this word as it is fully defined) of our gold rich deposits. Yes, it does make sense.

Large corporations have a limited way to grow. The old fashion way was to send geologists all over the world with a rock pick and loop. Later technology improved these still useful tools. but the intent was the same. As the world became more and more accessible, some geologists believe that their hands and eyes have covered the earth’s surface and few if any undiscovered gold deposits remain. Hmmm, any comments from the professional geologists, engineers and miners on this?

Research was another method of finding assets. Homestake and its northern California McLaughton Mine is an example. The current method favored by the big boys is to gobble another mining company. Barrick, which suckered Homestake into a merger, is a noteworthy example; however, there are many new consolidations that have taken place all over the world. Oligopolies and monopolies come to mind. I considered raising the Sherman Anti-trust laws with the Homestake/Barrick merger. Apparently none raised the issue. Homestake was an American icon and had no business allowing it to be absorbed by the Canadian corporation under the conditions at that time. (I attended the last Homestake meeting with a shareholder’s proxy and voted against the merger.)

So, where does all this leave the industry? The big boys have become even bigger and operate like other big bureaucracies. Surprisingly, they work against the small miner. (Source: numerous former MSHA employees).

Years ago Homestake investigated the Alleghany Mining District. In 1993 or 1994, I received a phone call from a Homestake director. Questions were asked about our newly discovered use of metal detectors. I was puzzled and asked why the interest? The reply was we know that many innovations in mining come from the small operations and we are watching you. So, they watched, took no action and are now out of business. In 1990, when our lessee was losing its fight to sustain its operation, Billiton (the mining subsidiary of Shell Oil) worked hard with its evaluation of the Sixteen to One mine. As the data moved up the ladder, someone decided to pass. Who knows what would be happening in Alleghany if Billiton had jumped in? We have thousands of dollars of reports from various “lookers”, which are definitely valuable; however, none stepped forward to take the risk.

After my thirty-year flirtations in this bizarre gold deposit and very private, world wide gold industry, I have developed some opinions about the thoughts of Greenhorn and the big boys. Briefly, they include much of what auriferous just nailed down: inability to evaluate the risk/reward, effort and likelihood of success of profitably mining in a deposit like ours; unwillingness for an individual to take a personal risk; ease of ‘going to mine’ in another country (although the times of wild exploitation in third world countries have become more risky and dangerous); and, what corporate director or president could be comfortable in his Denver, New York, Toronto or Johannesburg office in a gold mine whose ore is measured in ounces per pound.
 By auriferous

08/27/2005  8:50AM

It's interesting that this latest thread is under the "wake-up alarm" heading, as it seems that the alarm has been going off for some time, with most (not just on this forum) deciding to hit the snooze button.

My posts are few and far between, but I thought I should throw my two cents in as well. I don't like to see someone who asks tough questions labeled an idiot. Although, to be fair, Tom, your initial post accuses Mike of being drunk; hardly a good first impression.

So, to the issue of Tom's concerns as a businessman and the necessities of financial data versus the realities of the mining industry, especially at the 16-to-1. One of the great difficulties of running a mine like this one is the lack of any proven resources on which to base financing, or even assign risk. Basically, the new technologies that allow mining of sub-micron size particles of gold also allow a comprehensive exploration program that, while expensive, can often fairly accurately predict the size and grade of a reserve. That is not possible at the 16-to-1. The geology of the deposit simply doesn't allow the level of certainty that is required by the modern business world to measure the risk. Without that measurement, it can't be managed. That's a paraphrase of William Hewlett.

So, Mike's apparent inability to manage the mine doesn't stem from a personal shortfall, it is a symptom of what he, or any other manager, would have to deal with. I would challenge any CEO of any successful corporation to come in and run this mine. They would require more information than is possible (economically) from this deposit. So, you have to depend on historical production, old miners, and luck. None of these is something you will find in GAAP. It's something only a wildcat like Mike would use to justify the great cost in time, money, and men to extract what nature has left.

But Mike is running short on all of the above resources. The skills to physically operate a mine like this are going away at a rapid rate. Mechanized, diesel-powered mining is taking the place of compressed air and jacklegs. Men who know how to set timber and lay rail are in short supply. Cash is virtually nonexistent. Time is running short for all involved. Mike needs someone with the same visionary type of crazy that he has to come in and supply the cash necessary to achieve a dream. Most businesspeople today are like you, Tom. They want hard figures that are simply as in short supply as the miners.

Projects that are designed and executed "by committee" always end up behind schedule, over budget, and rarely please everyone involved. More often than not, when something great is achieved or built, it is because one or two wealthy, visionary souls had the courage to step outside of convention, put up the cash to meet their dreams, and refuse to give in to detractors, naysayers, regulators, and even shareholders.

Compare, for instance, the proposed replacement of the World Trade Center with, say, the Golden Gate Bridge. Both are monumental construction projects that require public and private money. One is being designed by committee and is still just a hole in the ground. The other had the vision of a small group of engineers who refused to believe that such a structure was not possible and met the challenges that nature and the public put up.

Mike could have built the Golden Gate Bridge. Tom is working with a business community that only sees a hole in the ground.
 By greenhorn

08/26/2005  1:56PM

To ask a somewhat different question, are there larger gold mining firms out there that might be interested in the 16 to 1's assets, and able to bring more capital to bear on exploiting its potential? Could it make sense to think of a sale of the entire operation?

I don't know, just asking.
 By Michael Miller

08/24/2005  6:53PM

Dear Tom,
First, I am always on the sauce. It is all a game of words and definitions. Trying to explain this 100 year old company with a 150 million year old geologic gold structure with nothing but circumstantial evidence to offer as proof ain’t fun (that is why the sauce is always with me). So, be more specific. Write a page and distribute it in order to see if any C.W.Best (catepillar business tycoon at Ruby Mine), Gamble’s (Proctor &Gamble at Kenton Mine), Bernard M. Baruch (Sixteen to One Mine0, Hearst’s or likeminded adventurers, entrepreneurs, treasure seekers (treasures come in many packages) or others who stepped forward in Alleghany in the past with their honest money are alive in the United States today. I believe they exist. Maybe it is the guy who owns the Indiana Colts. I read about him. He has a wild side. Maybe it is a real estate developer, who is bored with plundering the open spaces with new home construction or malls. Maybe it is a thespian, author or lucky man or woman whose family passed great wealth to him/her. Maybe it is the super rich Russian, native from China, oil sheik, or better yet one of their heirs who also wants to take a risk and provide some working capital to save and spread an American culture worth passing to the grand children.

You see, Tom, I am tapped out on ideas on how to find this person. Maybe it is calling Bill O’Riley and relating how a small company stopped the privatization of prosecution, criminalizing accidents and hopes to stop lawyers from misleading the court and committing perjury in our courtrooms. Maybe Bill’s interest will expose our deal. But what is the deal, you ask. Well, it is whatever we work out between the new capitalists desires and the company.

I understand your confusion; however the answers are all here in the Sixteen to One library called a web site. That old tired saying,”If it were easy, everybody would be doing it” applies. It isn’t easy and few if any are doing it (mining gold in the world’s most proven yet quiet gold deposit) in California. We are and we could do a lot better with some working capital. The reasons we are broke can be found within these pages. The plan is outlined as well. Can you dig it? Thanks for your interest, burp.
 By big tom

08/24/2005  2:47PM

Mike-
I have a passion for gold exploration and high grade, however I find your proposal extreemly confusing. Please explain in ore detail wen your not on the sauce.
-TOM (Texas Oil Man)
 By Michael Miller

06/20/2005  11:36PM

George,

A dozen years ago, an article about overturning the origin asked, “What if Marbury v. Madison was wrongly decided?” In the Federalist Number 51, Madison argued that the only effective means of ensuring compliance with the Constitution is “by so contriving the interior structure of the government as that its several constituent parts may, by their mutual relations, be the means of keeping each other in their places.”

This is exactly the case with us. The legislative acts are the “law”. The execution of the “law” is by the executive branch. Legislative v executive was recognized by Madison. He did not envision a system of government in which the Supreme Court would serve a kind of constitutional policing function, but one in which the very organization of the constituent branches would prevent each branch from violating the Constitution by encroaching on the [powers of another. Marbury runs against the grain of Madison’s ideal.

It’s all about policing that we want judged. We are between the legislative and the executive agencies, which seem to wander all over the place in policy. Maybe that is a good execution of a policy but as far as a private party, we have been damaged. Over thirteen hundred people have been directly damaged. It is hard to count the others dependent upon mining gold. There are many.

The similarities connecting the two battles are: laws may be unjust, may be unwise, may be dangerous, may be destructive; and yet not be unconstitutional as to justify the Judges in refusing to validate; within the ninth circuit Court of Appeals the moving party is non government and the aggressor is the government…within the California Superior Court the moving party is non government and the defendant is non government;

As to the Constitutionality of laws, the Judges will meet that point in their proper official character to weigh all testimony and facts. The record is growing for Tom Knox is hear sanctions coming from the bench to him. He has misled the Court with regard to many of his written and verbal remarks. Does “specious” come to mind? Also the judiciary could declare an unconstitutional law void. What happens to the victory is immediate but does the legislative act become void at the precious moment the verdict is given?

The motions before you exceed a “specious” act. Knox is misleading the Court.

Downieville is the focus. I plan to present a compelling recital for granting my notice of default. At the best one could agree it is only form over matter, so what’s the big deal? Maybe Judge Young will deny the motion because the non-government law combatants are so disheveled that their rules can be broken unchecked. Sometimes those breaks need checking and the word needs to be widely broadcasted. The practice of law by the defendants must be checked.

These are my thought, so late tonight. Thanks for the week. It really is fun to do this. I cannot imagine a more complex play to perform. Remember our discussion about the Brown Bear driving to your house?? Thanks for the interchange. Michael
 By Michael Miller

05/11/2005  11:57PM

MSHA hearing De-briefing


FOUNDATION ONE

1. The recognition of a possible misapplication of a MSHA standard may help eliminate injury or death in a mine.
2. Reducing injury or death in the Sixteen to One mine is and has been the top priority of everyone associated with the operation.
3. MSHA’s legal authorization is established by legislation entitled Federal Mine Safety & Health Act of 1977, and states: the first priority and concern of all in the coal or other mining industry must be the health and safety of its most precious resource—the miner.
4. MSHA regulation requires an operator to conduct an investigation into accidents and fatalities on a mine site. Since 1997, my personal policy is to conduct an investigation into the actual circumstances of each and every citation issued by MSHA and its California equivalent, OSHA.
5. I did this after receiving the citations issued on 3-9-10, by Weisbeck under consideration today.
6. My conclusions are: (a) Not a single miner could receive injuries or die because of the actual circumstances at the mine in the areas he cited; (b) There was no likelihood of evidence to support the allegation of violating a standard.


FOUNDATION TWO

Topics proposed to discuss by I&M. Both will be asked by M. I go first. (MSHA presents its case first because it is the initiator of damages AS THE PETITIONER.)

1. Do you know that yesterday MSHA offered “speculations” as “facts” about the actual circumstances at the mine?
2. Think of two main categories: first the mine itself and second its operation by miners and management. Testify actual circumstances relevant to contradict or explain statements you heard or read yesterday in this hearing.
Start with the mine to contradict.
Explain.

3. For I only: When you belly crawled through the second exit with Weisbeck, did you measure the opening? Did Jim measure the opening? Explain the process of passing through this area. From where and how did you approach the spot? What were you wearing? And Weisbeck if you recollect? Did you consider it a hazardous experience?
Results in evidence: the 1300 level met second exit size. Weisbeck’s example of “belly crawl” was made to imply impassable or highly likely impassible or maybe just “reasonably” likely impassible. In any event his choice of words may sway the judge in his favor. If this were just a mistake in terms, that is one thing. If it is to get his way, that is misleading the court and a crime in California for a member of the State Bar. For a sworn witness it is also a crime of perjury.

FOUNDATION FOUR

Observation from May 5 hearing: Weisbeck is not qualified to testify about the law, according to the federal attorney presiding for petitioner. Unless she will take the oath, can she testify? If not, whom can I argue the MSHA standard with at this hearing? ALJ informed, cautioned and excluded me from arguing with the only other federal person qualified, Ms Del Santo, as I was instructed to call herby ALJ. At times all of us were talking at once, until the judge yelled us down. It did not happen more than a dozen times each day. Each person in the room had at least one shot prior to this hearing at me. On Friday each one took a second shot. “Ruthless” became a player for the remaining testimony. “Patience”, “cunning” were also players. “Sweet” is on the sideline.
1.
2.
3
 By Michael Miller

04/09/2005  3:57PM

Mining is always going on with me in the mines. Sometimes I choose not to talk about it. I could talk mining all day every day at any hour. I choose not to write about every little topic in detail or even at all. Much about what I believe in, regarding the veins of gold that traverse within our property is a non public subject. So here is an answer, Johnny Yuma :


Dear Editor:

HOW can I reach my fellow Sierra County residents and those in nearby communities? Please help spread the word that the best event of its kind held throughout the world will be in Sierra County this weekend, all three nights. Banff’s film festival is unlike any others when it comes to cinematography and thrills. Discovering this golden gem the last two years moved and ignited me to join the Sierra County Arts Council. When I learned that the arts council was in jeopardy, my first thought was losing the Banff Mountain Film Festival. We have the smallest venue for Banff on its worldwide tour!

My fellow mountain rural neighbors, YOU MUST DO WHATEVER YOU CAN TO ATTEND. Come to as many shows as you dare risk your time and money; however, you must try to get to one. The program has a type of adventure that is hard to capture, providing the viewer with profound life-changing appreciations for man and his environment and cultures. Images from the radical reels on tour will replay in your mind forever. Just knowing that there are fools far greater than us will give us added confidence as we plow through the turmoil of life in Sierra County. I know this sounds corny, but the experiences shared by the audiences will strengthen our collective outlook. Hey, more bonding by our little 3000 plus residents is a good thing.

Last year I heed and hawed and did not buy a ticket. I knew I wanted to go but… That afternoon when I realized it was crazy to doubt making the time for the shows, I was fortunate and got a seat. Don’t let this happen to you. If you have never talked with anyone who has seen the festival, do. Otherwise you probably won’t go because you don’t know how enjoyable and entertaining the program! Men, women, dogs and other critters perform breath-taking stunts. So do those who shoot the film, the audio and camera risk takers. We get to sit in our little warm theater on wooden seats in early spring and live their life with them. They have invited us in to an emotional kaleidoscope.

Please give it a shot and take a modest risk with your time. Come to the Yuba Theater in Downieville this Friday, Saturday or Sunday. If you normally feel uncomfortable with the “natural fiber” crowd, who regularly follow events such as this, let’s fill the place with locals. If you can only spare one day, grab a ticket for Sunday 5pm to 7:30pm. This additional day is a first for Sierra County. The best of the best will be replayed.

Michael Miller, president
Sierra County Arts Council
Alleghany

I’ll be giving tickets, collecting money and sneaking a peek at the films. There are a few tickets left for Sunday. Tonight is sold out.
 By John Yuma

04/08/2005  3:46PM

Is anything going on at the mine like mining??
 By Michael Miller

03/30/2005  9:17PM

Last night I was writing from memory. George actually said, “intellectual and legal dishonesty” not just intellectual dishonesty. The CDAA defense led by Tom Knox is typical of insurance lawyers. I had a conversation with a long time corporate attorney and pal in Sacramento today about Tom Knox’s approach to the law. He reminded me that all insurance litigants would lie and mislead the court in defense of their client. It is expected. Lloyds of London, not Gale Filter and his gang pay Knox. So who really is the client? All of us in business pay the exorbitant insurance policy premiums because of the games insurance lawyers play. It is time for the court to step in and demand judicial respect for the American public. Is this likely to happen?

I am sure that most judges are just as sick and tired of hearing the nonsense and intellectual and legal dishonesty in their courtroom. The time is now to make a difference. It has never been more appropriate. Four of my former business and personal lawyers are judges (one has retired). This has given me an unique insight of the inner workings of the courtroom. There are times when these judges internally scream for the opposing lawyer to challenge unprofessional behavior of their adversaries. It is seldom done because the lawyers drink from the same trough. It takes an exceptional professional to bring down the miscreants in their field.
 By Rick

03/30/2005  8:38PM

Has any CDAA hack ever addressed the Court during the ongoing procedings with a cordial "hello"?

Let's start checking the Recorder for details. Maybe Mike said "Excuse me" once to allow GF to drink from the Sierra County water fountain before some CDAA schmuck messed up the water issues and actually drank it himself.
 By bluejay

03/30/2005  2:11AM

George's expression, "intellectual dishonesty" rang a bell for me tonight. First, I would like to say that I have personally engaged George in a few conversations and I have found him to be an unusually fair and reasonable man.

In all my life I have never been associated with, in one manner or another, more consistently dishonest and unprofessional people than in the legal profession. I'm sure there are some fine lawyers but I have only met one, George.

I have been in meetings with attorneys where they have demonstrated their lack of respect for the letter of the law. What they pride themselves on most is how smart they think they are and what they can get away with.

I have been lied to by attorneys and I have subjected to their grafty intimidations. Even in my own family I have one trying to cheat me out of a portion of my inheritance with our own 86 year old mother. Too many ignorant people give the profession too much respect.

So, when Mike tells his story concerning the law firm defending the CDAA miscreants in their efforts to dislodge the honorable Superior Court Judege Stanley Young I completely understand their behavior.

The attorneys that I have dealt with have considered themselves blantantly above the letter of the law. As a matter of my observations, they consider themselves smart in the respect of being able to beat the system by manipulating it for their selfish ends.

Here's an example: I personally knew an attorney who was advising another attorney to disrespect government regulations. The first attorney said the second attorney wasn't breaking the law because a legal paper hadn't been filed yet to prove he was in violation of anything. I said, why hasn't the notarized government trust form been filed? He said, I'll file that late after the trust matures and pay the late fee. The two attorneys were guilty of not only of morally breaking the law but they were both basically "intellectually dishonest" people.
 By Michael Miller

03/29/2005  9:39PM

While I was cleaning up after dinner tonight, a thought struck me: some personalities will ever understand life unless they have panned for gold. It is not so much the gold but the panning that is the relevance in this thought. Here is the rationale.

The action of panning for gold requires a deep understanding of the universe. It also requires the dexterity to plan and implement the laws of the universe to your benefit. By accomplishing the simple art and science of panning for gold, the implementation of the art and science of living your life may reach a clarity heretofore unfound. Is not that one of our drives for knowledge? Clarity?

As I was eating my dinner, George’s remarks this afternoon and the interaction we had with the Superior Court of Sierra County and the lawyers defending the CDAA crowd ran through my head. Law, lawyers, perjury, misleading the court, intentional misleading the court verses just being stupid about the law (which I fully sympathize with), deceit and what George so clearly said in so few words, “intellectual dishonesty”, played in my mind.

It seems that the judicial branch of our government no longer addresses “intellectual dishonesty”. What happened to the fear and consequences of perjury? Well, if all the lawyers have incorporated intellectual dishonesty, which is a twentieth century term for lying, misrepresentation and perjury, into their day to day routine, how can it be reversed? How about one step at a time by striking it down when advocates practice it? This is where we are with our claim to recover the damages inflicted on the shareholders of Original Sixteen To One Mine, Inc. and Michael M. Miller. In their defense of our serious claim, the bad guys are mocking the most esteemed branch of American politics, the one we turn to for executive and legislative redress, the judicial system. These lawyers, now representing the CDAA lawyers, are also practicing the behavior of their clients.

Here is the story, briefly because it is late. The CDAA lawyers called for an ex parte hearing this afternoon at 4:30 pm. One of their issues was kicking off the judge, who was scheduled to hear their motions on April 6, 2005, in Downieville. A lawyer named Hansen swore under penalty of perjury that because of a statement in my declaration he was questioning the integrity of the judge. I wrote that Jonathan and I expressed a courtesy “hello” to Superior Court Judge Stanley Young one afternoon on the steps of the Downieville courthouse after an appearance in court. Mr. Hansen declared that this casual “hello” has compromised Judge Young’s ability to rule fairly at the April 6, 2005 hearing in Downieville. Hansen’s law firm of Knox et al plans to present a motion to recuse the judge because he now is not able to judge the issues before him. The CDAA lawyer said that it was impossible to ascertain the depth of the conversation between those of us standing in front of the courthouse by the words in my declaration. Friends, I know this is hard to believe, but Knox’s associate swears this to be a legitimate possibility. I t is all in sworn documents by the lawyers. My statement was crystal clear and even a grammar school student would understand it. I wrote, “We all exchanged brief hellos.” The whole paragraph is at Sierra Court Superior Court Filings entered 3/24/2005, paragraph 6. Society should be outraged, and it would be if it knew how dishonest these lawyers were treating the dignity of our court. There is something on the web site that I wrote a while ago entitled, ‘Now is the Time”. I think it can be found under the NEWS section. Check it out for it still rings true only now California has 200,000 members of the State Bar. Help clean the intellectual dishonesty from our courts. Now is the time. Clarity.

Page 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4 | Page 5 | Page 6 | Page 7 | Page 8 | Page 9 | Page 10 | Page 11 ]

 

  
 
© 2017 Original Sixteen to One Mine, Inc.
PO Box 909
Alleghany, California 95910
 

Phone:   
Fax:
E-mail:
 
(530) 287-3223      
(530) 287-3455
corp@origsix.com
 

      Gold Sales:  


(530) 287-3540

goldsales@origsix.com
 



Design & development by
L. Kenez