Discussion - Of Mr. Shockley's Paper on The Bogoslovsk Mining Estate (see p. 274)

H. W. MussEn, Collingwood, Ontario, Can. (communication to the Secretary*):—Doubtless all engineers who have paid more than a casual visit to Russia have come into contact with that formidable document, the " smieta," or estimate of the Russian manager. It is an institution which seems to be inseparable from Russian mining-methods. As Mr. Shockley points out, the year's costs a agree very closely" with the figures of the smieta made at the beginning of the year. In cases which have come under my notice, I have been satisfied that there had been a good deal of " rigging" of accounts to this end. The sum spent by the manager was carefully kept down to the total of the estimate, because it was well known that no more money would be forthcoming, and when this is done it is not a difficult matter to see that the right amounts come under the right heads in the final accounts. I do not say that this is always the case, but I have come across notable instances. Looking at it from the Russian owner's point of view, I think that the balance of the argument is usually in favor of the smieta as limiting " impulsive indiscretion" on the part of managers. The Russian Mining Code of to-day leaves much to be desired, but this is thoroughly appreciated by the official world there, and great changes are spoken of for the future. In many, if not in most, cases the laws are interpreted liberally, and a great deal is left to the discretion of the district mining engineer or inspector, with whom it is necessary to keep in close touch. As Mr. Shockley points out, the officials of a mine, who are always Russians, are held personally responsible for accidents resulting to employees, quite independently of any compensation which may be made to the sufferer. This seems startling enough, but I have always found that a penalty is imposed only