I don't know of any published work on this but the County Record Offices
will have files which record the relevant correspondence.
In many cases, there was a lot of dickering about the terms of the longer
leases, particularly as companies became larger during the early-mid C19th.
Usually the points of contention focused on the mineral lords' wish to
ensure that the mine was 'developed' and not 'picked'. This was
essentially unproductive work for the lessee and tended to get neglected in
short term leases or towards the end of a lease. Generally speaking there
was no obligation to 'develop' a mine if a Take note was issued. Commonly
the lessees argued about the minimum number of men to be employed in the
mine or more specifically on the 'dead work' of development. Some of the
northern correspondence jargon centres around 'the number of dead men to be
employed' in the mine.
Also, with larger mining fields some adventurers wanted to take on larger
areas of the mining field than they could reasonably exploit and this too
was the subject of negotiation.
Also, the royalty was the subject of some hard bargaining particularly in
some of the marginally economic mines in Cumbria.
Richard Smith
3M UK Bracknell, B2-3N,
Environment, Safety and Security [log in to unmask]
Tel: 01344-858154 (Trim. 8-230-2154)
Fax: 01344-858367 (Trim. 8-230-2367)
|