In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

93 3 A Geography of Mercury Mining in California DOI: 10.5876/9781607322436:c03 In June 1869, E. R. Sampson wrote to the president and directors of the Quicksilver Mining Company in New York concerning his recent visit to the New Idria Mine: I took one of the foremen from New Almaden with me and on inspection we agreed that we saw a good mine. The ore is more plentiful than ours, but not so good quality . . . They have an abundance of ore on hand and could work double the number of hands to advantage upon ore in sight, if they desired—they pay a less price per carga than we do but the men make better wages at the lesser price owning to the ore being so much more plenty and more easily worked . . . We found a large number of our miners at work there. They work about 300 men and we about 500.1 The development of the New Idria Mine, and the way it was worked through much of the nineteenth century, together serve as an example of the complex interplay of many factors, both natural and cultural, shaping the California mercury landscape. These factors include geology and geography, money and power, and technology and business practice. Although prospected in the early 1850s, the mine was not developed on an industrial scale until William Barron, Thomas Bell, and other members of the Bank Crowd purchased it in 1858, when the New Almaden Mine was threatened with closure by court injunction.2 As was detailed in chapter 2, Barron, Bell, and the Bank Crowd manipulated production at New Idria, increasing or decreasing production as benefited their attempts to control the quicksilver trade. Although the use of the New Idria Mine as a tool for controllingthequicksilvermarketwaseconomicandsocial, the geology of the mine helped make the Bank Crowd’s mode of operation possible. According to Sampson, the cinnabar deposit at the New Idria Mine was extensive and relatively easy to mine. Although the ore at New Idria was poorer than at New Almaden, it was plentiful and it lay in predictable formations, eliminating the need for expensive a geography of mercury mining in california 94 prospecting work as was necessary at New Almaden (Figure 3.1). In addition, the ground was firm, requiring little timbering, yet was more easily dug than the rock at New Almaden, and the mine was also dry, requiring neither elaborate pumping systems nor constant vigilance and maintenance. Best of all for the Bank Crowd, the New Idria ore deposits were easily worked: “As the mountain is very bold and precipitous , all their workings are tapped by a series of tunnels, run at different levels at very small expense” (Figure 3.2).3 The particular geology of the New Idria Mine aided the Bank Crowd in easily increasing or decreasing production, and together the geology and history of the mine show that ideas such as maximum efficiency and full production are not the most useful ideas for understanding the New Idria Mine landscape. Instead, considering that its owners did not maximize production—nor did they overly invest in its infrastructure despite the great production capacity of the mine— other themes are best for understanding the mine, especially underdevelopment. The infrastructure at the mine was poorly developed, including notoriously bad roads and a deficient reduction plant, of which Sampson wrote, “I do not consider the reduction works as being in good condition, an evidence of which is the fact that many of the employees are suffering from salivation (mercury poisoning), which could not occur if there were no leakage.”4 He went on: “Should they be disposed to expend more money on furnaces and equipment, they could compete favorably with the New Almaden Mine in product and would no doubt come in on equal footing if the combination were continued.”5 This underdevelopment was a conscious choice, in step with the Bank Crowd’s plans for controlling the mercury markets. Interestingly, the New Idria Mine went on to be the largest producing quicksilver mine in the Western Hemisphere in the twentieth century, in part because its cinnabar was only modestly exploited in the nineteenth century, despite the plentiful ore and the relative ease of mining it (Figure 3.3).6 As Sampson stated, “The great difference to my mind between that mine and the New Almaden is that the New Idria is comparatively a virgin mine, whilst ours is not.”7 ThisexampleoftheNewIdriaMinedemonstratestheimportanceofunderstanding the interrelations between mines as physical...

Share