Search Documents

Ware B. Gay, Richmond, Va.: Having followed the remarks of Prof. Woodworth with great interest, especially his suggestions for drilling in the part of the coal-field on the south side of the James river, I would like to inquire of him if he reached his conclusions after fully considering the situation as existing upon the north side of the James ? My reason for this inquiry is, that upon the north side the eastern and western outcrops are much nearer each other than appears to me to be the case upon the south side, and also that the western outcrop on the north side is much more clearly defined than upon the south side. It is now about twelve years since I first became interested in the Richmond coal-field—and until about six years ago I passed much time in investigation and spent thousands of dollars in developments. About six years ago the properties in which I was more especially interested were leased to other parties, and since that time I have had little or nothing to do with the mining operations. I regret to say the price of coals has ruled so low during most of the time since the lease was made that the developments have not been as extensive as the lessees had originally intended. The result of my investigations after considering all the theories, expert reports, legends and other information I could obtain bearing upon the subject, was the opinion, which I still hold, that the most practicable and most economical way for proving the extent and value of the field is by sinking slopes from the eastern outcrop, and by prosecuting such slopes in the vein and following the coal to the western outcrop, thus obtaining an actual cross-section in fact and not in theory. Proceeding upon this hypothesis, I sought for the positions where this could probably be accomplished most quickly and develop a marketable coal-area as the work thus progressed. The outcrops on the north side being nearer each other, and

Jan 1, 1902

Jan 1, 1912

J. Parke Channing, New York, N. Y. (communication tb the Secretary*):—Mr. Wright, in his introductory paragraph, says: "It is commonly believed by metallurgists that in copper-smelting, the copper in the slags, which is irreducible by continued smelting, is retained in the form of 'prills' of matte." On a recent visit to Greenwood, B. C., I was discussing with J. E. McAllister, the general manager of the British Columbia Copper Co., and the former metallurgist of the Tennessee Copper Go., this very question; and he held strongly to the idea that the copper in slag was in two forms—one portion contained in occluded matte and the other as an oxide. He believed that this same rule would apply to the silver in the slag. From my experience I am strongly inclined to agree with Mr. McAllister; and it appears quite reasonable that in furnaces treating oxidized copper-ores, and to a less degree in furnaces treating sulphide ores, there is always bound to be present a certain amount of copper oxide and silver oxide, which will behave like any base and get into the slag as such. We all know that in Arizona, in the early days, when it was customary to produce black copper, because the ores were nearly all oxidized or carbonates, and eulphur was scarce, the slags as a rule carried 2.5 per cent. of copper and seldom ran

Jan 1, 1911

Robert W. Hunt, Chicago, Ill.:—It has been my good fortune to know of this development of Mr. York's for some time, and I think he will permit me to say that this is not the first demonstration that he has made of his method for rolling difficult shapes, and which, as he has stated, had in the past been regarded as practically impossible. I have good reason to know that Mr. York has been successful on other lines, because I myself went through a period of professional disrepute for having reported favorably on his methods, which received discredit up to the time that it was practically demonstrated that his claims were true ones. Years ago Mr. York built a mill at Duluth, Minn., for the production of structural shapes, and notably of what might be called balanced beams—beams that did not have flanges of restricted width. His scheme was to produce beams with flanges so wide that they could be used in place of built-up beams. The mill, of course, went through the difficulties that such a mill would have to encounter. I mas called upon to make an examination of the property and report. These beams were rolled on a universal mill—a mill which would admit of various-sized sections without change of rolls. I was convinced that Mr. York could do it, and I so reported. Having received condemnation and ridicule for having taken that position, later on I was glad to find that Mr. John Fritz had come to the same conclusion, and had so reported. I concluded we both could rest content, while awaiting developments. Later still, as we all know, there was another difficulty that Mr. York met with—namely, that the architects or structural engineers would not accept his proposed sections. That is still a great difficulty in America. Later, the Grey mill came into successful operation in Luxemburg, producing such sections, which are being used in England and on the Continent. In fact, the whole process, both from a commercial and a mechanical point of view, is a success. The Bethlehem Steel Co., Bethlehem, Pa.,

Jan 1, 1907

Jan 1, 1913

E. A. H. Tays, San Blas, Sinaloa, Mex. (communication to the Secretary*):—The results obtained by Messrs. Hofman and Hayward in their experiments, proving that a low percentage of copper sulphate with a variable percentage of salt, depending on the ore, gives the best results, confirm practical mill-work which I did in 1895. I have none of my notes, taken at the time, to refer to, so have to rely solely on memory, which precludes the conciseness that is alway desirable. In 1894 I took charge of the plant of the San Rafael Company, near Chinipas, Chihuahua, Mex., which at that time was treating a very refractory ore carrying about $15 in gold and from 20 to 25 oz. of silver per ton, the bullion being about 300 fine in gold. The silver in the ore was in the form of a sulphide. Although carrying an average of 0.75 oz. of gold per ton, free gold could rarely be seen by panning, but upon roasting a sample of the ore the gold became visible at once—a result which was discovered by chance and used to advantage later. In order to utilize the old mill to the best advantage, it was decided to use pan-amalgamation after roasting. The roasting, done in a lime-kiln, was similar to the ordinary " burning " operation. The roasted ore was trammed to the mill-bins and crushed by 10 stamps to pass a 30-mesh screen. The pulp was de-watered and fed to four 1-ton pans. My recollection is that upon starting the mill-work, the charge contained 1.5 lb. of copper sulphate and 5 per cent. of salt per ton. From the start the extraction was unsatisfactory and the loss of quicksilver was very large. Experiments were then carried out on a working scale. First, the quantity of copper sulphate was increased 4 oz. at a time; then it was reduced

Jan 1, 1910

William Kent, Montclair, N. J. (communication to the Secretary*):—The authors say, "The factor which determines the completeness of combustion of tlie volatile matter, after it has bee11 mixed with a certain amount of air, is the length of time the mixture is allowed to remain in the combustion-space; but this length of time depends on the extent of the space itself."

Jan 1, 1911

Continued Discussion of the papers of Van Hise, Emmons, Weed and Lindgren, Bans., xxx., 27, 177, 424, 578. See also the papers of Vogt, Kemp, Rickard, Blake and Lindgren, at pp. 125, 169, 198, 220, 226, and also the final contribution of Prof. Van Hise, p. 284 of the present volume. All the foregoing, together with the discussion here following, are included in the special volume, "The Genesis of Ore-Deposits," issued this year by the Institute. H. Foster Bain, Des Moines, Iowa (communication to the Secretary):* The zinc- and lead-deposits of the Mississippi valley, which it has been my fortune to study, give particularly good examples of many of the principles of ore-deposition formulated by Prof. Van Hise. Perhaps there is nowhere clearer evidence supporting his fundamental tenet., that ore-bodies are to be regarded as a result, and as merely one of the phases, of the work of underground waters. The facts regarding the mines of the upper Mississippi valley have been given in some detail for Wisconsin by Prof. Chamberlint and, more recently, for the mines west. of the Mississippi by the Iowa Geological Survey.‡ Fortunately, also, the processes of underground water-circulation have been studied in some detail in connection with the investigation of artesian waters throughout the region.$ In Missouri and Arkansas the mines and ore-bodies have been much studied ; but the general problems of the circulation of underground waters have been neglected. During the season just closed the writer has been engaged in a re-study for the United States Geological Survey of the zinc- and lead-deposits of the Ozark region, with special reference to those of the . Joplin area; and his full report is now in preparation. It has been interesting to note how fully the statement that the orebodies result from the general action of underground waters is

Jan 1, 1902

By E. C. Robertson

D.G. Wilder I found the suggestion that the amount of displacement of a fault can be numerically related to the thickness of gouge or breccia to be both intuitively satisfying and intriguing. I have long agreed that there is some type of relationship between the amount of gouge and the amount of displacement of faults. I congratulate the author for developing a numerical relationship between them. However, I am concerned that the limits for applying this relationship be fully understood. An underlying assumption in this approach is that there is either a uniform thickness of gouge or breccia along a given fault or the thickness does not vary widely. Since it is not always possible to confirm this, the displacements derived by this method should be viewed with caution unless significant fault extent can be observed. At the Nevada Test Site, in drifts constructed in granite for test emplacement of spent nuclear reactor fuel, we found a fault with 0.3 to 0.4 m (12 to 16 in.) of clay gouge. Within a few meters of this location, the fault had no clay gouge, but rather consisted of a highly fractured zone with significantly altered rock and some slickensides. Based on Fig. 1, the 0.3 to 0.4 m (12 to 16 in.) thickness of gouge would indicate a displacement in excess of 30 m (98 ft). However, no gouge thickness would indicate essentially no displacement. Based on a quartz vein that terminated on the fault, and is not identified nearby, an estimated displacement of more than a few meters was made. This estimate is consistent with that obtained using the regression line proposed in the paper if the 0.3 to 0.4 m (12 to 16 in.) thickness for the gouge is used. However, using the regression curves with zero thickness would not yield results consistent with what was observed in the field. Therefore, it is important to recognize that the suggested procedure would properly yield a range of probable displacements. ? *Work performed under the auspices of the US Department of Energy by the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory under Contract W-7405-Eng-48. Reply by E.C. Robertson It is certainly true that the t (thickness) of gg-bx (gouge and breccia) on a fault does vary along the fault. My observations have been that near the termination of a fault, the displacement d is small and the t is also small, whereas the maximum d and t will usually be found in the central part of the fault. The information on gg-bx and t of the fault found in granite in the NTS tunnel by Mr. Wilder could be interpreted somewhat differently than he does. He speaks of the fault changing within a few meters from 0.3 to 0.4 m (12 to 16 in.) of clay gg to "a highly fractured zone with significantly altered rock and some slickensides," but no gg. The highly fractured rock may be taken to be bx, rock not so finely ground as gg but still crushed by the fault movement, equivalent to the gg in my usage, and probably occupying about the same t. Mr. Wilder's estimates for the fault in the NTS tunnel for t of 0.3 to 0.4 m (12 to 16 in.) and for d of a quartz vein, in excess of "a few meters," would place the point on the low side of the central trend line in my Fig. 1, at the lower limit. There is, of course, a problem with determining d using displacement of only one planar surface. It would be greater or lesser depending on the rake of the movement. Finally, estimating the d of a fault from its t should be made with awareness of our present uncertainties, as pointed out by Mr. Wilder. Although the central trend line in my Fig. 1 has a ratio of d/t of 100, I have put the limiting ratios at 10 and 1000. Understanding of the values of the ratio will be improved only with collection of more data, for which the discussion of Mr. Wilder is much appreciated. G.C. Waterman E.C. Robertson's paper provides significant information to a geologist attempting to deduce fault offset by noting the products of structural dislocation. However, considerable mapping in underground and open-pit mines, and examination of structures produced in different geological settings, have convinced me that gouge and breccia thickness are controlled by geological conditions and fault movement. The following paragraphs suggest geological variables that control them. 1. Depth of Loading A near-surface fault resulting from tensional stress has more breccia/gouge than is produced by a similar stress at considerable depth. A deep-loaded compressional stress may produce a linear zone of schist, or structural dislocation may occur along an earlier formed belt of schist. Such "shear zones" are common in Canadian mines in precambrian rocks. In neither case can offset be directly deduced by an analysis of the minimal gouge/breccia in the shistose rocks. At greater depth, stress may be partially to wholly relieved by flowage. I vividly recall first noting the regional "Midas Thrust" in the Lark mine, Bingham Mining District, UT (where we called the structure the North Fault). My recorded notes, as I remember them, showed a narrow gouge streak separated the `Jordan" and "Commercial" limestone units from impure, muddy limestone beds of uncertain stratigraphic position. The visible structure did not indicate the great importance of this premineral fault

Jan 12, 1984

By D. G. Wilder

D.G. Wilder I found the suggestion that the amount of displacement of a fault can be numerically related to the thickness of gouge or breccia to be both intuitively satisfying and intriguing. I have long agreed that there is some type of relationship between the amount of gouge and the amount of displacement of faults. I congratulate the author for developing a numerical relationship between them. However, I am concerned that the limits for applying this relationship be fully understood. An underlying assumption in this approach is that there is either a uniform thickness of gouge or breccia along a given fault or the thickness does not vary widely. Since it is not always possible to confirm this, the displacements derived by this method should be viewed with caution unless significant fault extent can be observed. At the Nevada Test Site, in drifts constructed in granite for test emplacement of spent nuclear reactor fuel, we found a fault with 0.3 to 0.4 m (12 to 16 in.) of clay gouge. Within a few meters of this location, the fault had no clay gouge, but rather consisted of a highly fractured zone with significantly altered rock and some slickensides. Based on Fig. 1, the 0.3 to 0.4 m (12 to 16 in.) thickness of gouge would indicate a displacement in excess of 30 m (98 ft). However, no gouge thickness would indicate essentially no displacement. Based on a quartz vein that terminated on the fault, and is not identified nearby, an estimated displacement of more than a few meters was made. This estimate is consistent with that obtained using the regression line proposed in the paper if the 0.3 to 0.4 m (12 to 16 in.) thickness for the gouge is used. However, using the regression curves with zero thickness would not yield results consistent with what was observed in the field. Therefore, it is important to recognize that the suggested procedure would properly yield a range of probable displacements. ? *Work performed under the auspices of the US Department of Energy by the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory under Contract W-7405-Eng-48. Reply by E.C. Robertson It is certainly true that the t (thickness) of gg-bx (gouge and breccia) on a fault does vary along the fault. My observations have been that near the termination of a fault, the displacement d is small and the t is also small, whereas the maximum d and t will usually be found in the central part of the fault. The information on gg-bx and t of the fault found in granite in the NTS tunnel by Mr. Wilder could be interpreted somewhat differently than he does. He speaks of the fault changing within a few meters from 0.3 to 0.4 m (12 to 16 in.) of clay gg to "a highly fractured zone with significantly altered rock and some slickensides," but no gg. The highly fractured rock may be taken to be bx, rock not so finely ground as gg but still crushed by the fault movement, equivalent to the gg in my usage, and probably occupying about the same t. Mr. Wilder's estimates for the fault in the NTS tunnel for t of 0.3 to 0.4 m (12 to 16 in.) and for d of a quartz vein, in excess of "a few meters," would place the point on the low side of the central trend line in my Fig. 1, at the lower limit. There is, of course, a problem with determining d using displacement of only one planar surface. It would be greater or lesser depending on the rake of the movement. Finally, estimating the d of a fault from its t should be made with awareness of our present uncertainties, as pointed out by Mr. Wilder. Although the central trend line in my Fig. 1 has a ratio of d/t of 100, I have put the limiting ratios at 10 and 1000. Understanding of the values of the ratio will be improved only with collection of more data, for which the discussion of Mr. Wilder is much appreciated. ? G.C. Waterman E.C. Robertson's paper provides significant information to a geologist attempting to deduce fault offset by noting the products of structural dislocation. However, considerable mapping in underground and open-pit mines, and examination of structures produced in different geological settings, have convinced me that gouge and breccia thickness are controlled by geological conditions and fault movement. The following paragraphs suggest geological variables that control them. 1. Depth of Loading A near-surface fault resulting from tensional stress has more breccia/gouge than is produced by a similar stress at considerable depth. A deep-loaded compressional stress may produce a linear zone of schist, or structural dislocation may occur along an earlier formed belt of schist. Such "shear zones" are common in Canadian mines in precambrian rocks. In neither case can offset be directly deduced by an analysis of the minimal gouge/breccia in the shistose rocks. At greater depth, stress may be partially to wholly relieved by flowage. I vividly recall first noting the regional "Midas Thrust" in the Lark mine, Bingham Mining District, UT (where we called the structure the North Fault). My recorded notes, as I remember them, showed a narrow gouge streak separated the "Jordan" and "Commercial" limestone units from impure, muddy limestone beds of uncertain stratigraphic position. The visible structure did not indicate the great importance of this premineral fault

Jan 1, 1985

By K. A. Grace

K.A. Grace's article advocates usage of the terms describing resources as defined by the US Bureau of Mines (USBM) and the US Geological Survey (USGS). Originally recommended in 1943, the terms were revised in 1976 and again in 1980. Mr. Grace further recommends that the term reserves should be severely restricted and that it should encompass mining and processing factors. The list of references quoted in the article does not, however, mention the study concerning reserves that was made over a period of almost four years by a joint Committee on Definitions. This committee was sponsored by three societies - the American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers (AIME), the Society of Economic Geologists (SEG), and the American Institute of Professional Geologists (AIPG). Most of the detailed work was done by a working party appointed by the Society of Mining Engineers (SME) of AIME. After studying previous definitions in the US as well as in the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, France, and other European countries, the following definitions were proposed and accepted in 1974 by the SME board of directors. (Ore reserve definitions in Rhodesia, South Africa, or New Zealand were not mentioned as having been reviewed.) Table 1 lists definitions from MINING ENGINEERING, July 1975. Notice in Table 1 it was mentioned, under Resources, that the definitions of reserves were recommended for the purposes of commercial evaluation. It was further stated that the terminology adopted by the USBM and the USGS, as released to the public, covering resources, was recognized as such. Mr. Grace also recommends that reserve calculations should allow for future losses in ore tonnage, ore grade, milling, and smelting. Unfortunately, it might take years to develop a prospect after it has been discovered. Mining methods have to be tested before being finalized in order to know what tonnage of ore is going to be lost, or how much dilution is likely to occur. The same problems are present in concentrating or in smelting. Operating mines usually know how mined grade compares with ore reserve grade. They can usually predict fairly closely what their final metal recoveries are probably going to be. It is, however, expecting too much to have to delay quoting reserves from say a recently drilled prospect. Any responsible mining geologist or mining engineer (or company for that matter) should state several things about an ore reserve calculation: that it is or is not a preliminary estimate only; that estimated grades have not been diluted to allow for a future, as yet unknown, mining method; that metal recoveries are or are not only tentative, based perhaps on drill hole samples only or on no metallurgical testing at all. Reserves of a partially explored prospect are always quoted when it becomes necessary to raise capital. If they are described as preliminary only (really just tonnage and grade estimates and not true "reserves") in addition to being accompanied by some of the items just mentioned, nobody is going to be misled. If, on the other hand, a report by a member of the SME or SEG is intentionally misleading, the individual must be reported and eventually disbarred from his or her society. To summarize, let us stay with the definitions of ore, ore reserves, and related terms as recommended and accepted by SME. I might add that on occasion I have used a fourth category in my ore reserve calculations, namely Geologically Possible Ore. This category is more or less the same as Inferred ore defined by the USBM and USGS. I have never given a grade to this category, which may be based only on geological mapping, geochemical sampling, or geophysical traversing.

Jan 8, 1985

A. Cook K.A. Grace's article advocates usage of the terms describing resources as defined by the US Bureau of Mines (USBM) and the US Geological Survey (USGS). Originally recommended in 1943, the terms were revised in 1976 and again in 1980. Mr. Grace further recommends that the term reserves should be severely restricted and that it should encompass mining and processing factors. The list of references quoted in the article does not, however, mention the study concerning reserves that was made over a period of almost four years by a joint Committee on Definitions. This committee was sponsored by three societies - the American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers (AIME), the Society of Economic Geologists (SEG), and the American Institute of Professional Geologists (AIPG). Most of the detailed work was done by a working party appointed by the Society of Mining Engineers (SME) of AIME. After studying previous definitions in the US as well as in the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, France, and other European countries, the following definitions were proposed and accepted in 1974 by the SME board of directors. (Ore reserve definitions in Rhodesia, South Africa, or New Zealand were not mentioned as having been reviewed. Table 1 lists definitions from MINING ENGINEERING, July 1975. Notice in Table 1 it was mentioned, under Resources, that the definitions of reserves were recommended for the purposes of commercial evaluation. It was further stated that the terminology adopted by the USBM and the USGS, as released to the public, covering resources, was recognized as such. Mr. Grace also recommends that reserve calculations should allow for future losses in ore tonnage, ore grade, milling, and smelting. Unfortunately, it might take years to develop a prospect after it has been discovered. Mining methods have to be tested before being finalized in order to know what tonnage of ore is going to be lost, or how much dilution is likely to occur. The same problems are present in concentrating or in smelting. Operating mines usually know how mined grade compares with ore reserve grade. They can usually predict fairly closely what their final metal recoveries are probably going to be. It is, however, expecting too much to have to delay quoting reserves from say a recently drilled prospect. Any responsible mining geologist or mining engineer (or company for that matter) should state several things about an ore reserve calculation: that it is or is not a preliminary estimate only; that estimated grades have not been diluted to allow for a future, as yet unknown, mining method; that metal recoveries are or are not only tentative, based perhaps on drill hole samples only or on no metallurgical testing at all. [ ] Reserves of a partially explored prospect are always quoted when it becomes necessary to raise capital. If they are described as preliminary only (really just tonnage and grade estimates and not true "reserves") in addition to being accompanied by some of the items just mentioned, nobody is going to be misled. If, on the other hand, a report by a member of the SME or SEG is intentionally misleading, the individual must be reported and eventually disbarred from his or her society. To summarize, let us stay with the definitions of ore, ore reserves, and related terms as recommended and accepted by SME. I might add that on occasion I have used a fourth category in my ore reserve calculations, namely Geologically Possible Ore. This category is more or less the same as Inferred ore defined by the USBM and USGS. I have never given a grade to this category, which may be based only on geological mapping, geochemical sampling, or geophysical traversing. ?

Jan 1, 1986

By D. F. Ball, P. R. Dawson, J. T. Fitton

Report of discussion at December, 1970, IMM general meeting (Chairman: M. J. Cahalan, President) and contributed remarks on the paper published in Transactions/Section C (Mineral Processing & Extractive Metallurgy), vol. 79, September, 1970, pp. C189-96, plus the authors' replies. Contributors included Cohen E., Hope B., Wasse D.G., Shakespeare A.G., Burwood D.S., Jones H.A., Dartnell J., Carter G.C., Henderson T.A., Relf G. and Clark S.W.

Dec 1, 1971

By S. Y. Ezz

Report of discussion at February, 1971, IMM general meeting (Chairman : M. J. Cahalan, President) of a paper published in Transactions/ Section C (Mineral Processing & Extractive Metallurgy), vol. 79, September, 1970, pp. C226-C233 with contributions by Wild R. and Astier J. on fluidised bed reduction of iron ore fines

Dec 1, 1971

By B. W. Hester

Report of discussion at January, 1971, general meeting (Chairman: M. J. Cahalan, President) of the paper published in Transactions/Section B (Applied Earth Science), vol. 79, May, 1970, pp. B60-B67, and contributed remarks. Comments were made by Taylor J.T.M., James C.H., Lethbridge R.F. and Heath K.C.G.

Dec 1, 1971

By A. W. Fletcher

Report of discussion at February, 1971, IMM general meeting (Chairman: M. J, Cahalan President) of a paper published in Transactions/Section C (Mineral Processing & Extractive Metallurgy), vol. 79, December, 1970, pp. C247-52, and contributed remarks. Contributions are included from: Cahalan M.J., giving figures related to leaching Cu from pyrite at Rio Tinto 1880-1910; Noakes F.D.L.; Embling P.M.K.; Bradshaw A.V.; Le Roux N.W.; Kelly D.P.; and Tuovinen O.H. Questions were raised regarding impurity removal, effects of light and ultraviolet light on the bacteria, the economics of solvent extraction and the possibilities for other organisms or other metals

Dec 1, 1971

By J. R. Hammond, I. C. Herbert

Report of discussion at October, 1970, IMM general meeting (Chairman: M. J. Cahalan, President) and contributed remarks on the paper published in Transactions/Section C (Mineral Processing & Extractive Metallurgy), vol. 79, June, 1970, pp. C128-36 and introduced by I.C. Herbert. Contributors were von Struve G., on the application of balling discs and the use of basic additives; Young P.A., asking for details of the drying, grinding, balling, induration and specification testing equipment and processes; Davison J. on pellet swelling properties and Carter G.C. on disc operation, refractories and green ball properties.

Dec 1, 1971

By S. V. Shiraishi, H. B. Bell

Report of discussion at February, 1971, IMM general meeting (Chairman: M. J. Cahalan, President) of a paper published in Transactions/Section C (Mineral Processing & Extractive Metallurgy), vol. 79, June, 1970, pp. C120-C127, with a contribution by Wright P.A. on the miscibility gap

Dec 1, 1971

C. W. MERRILL*—Mr. Hughes' paper not only is very well presented but is most timely in that it covers a subject of vital interest to the United States. Tin is one of the strategic metals which has not been found here in appreciable quantities. The total United States tin output since the first recorded production over 100 years ago would not supply current consumption for a fortnight. On the consumption side, tin is extremely important in national defense because of its use in tin plate which, in the form of tin cans, makes it possible to feed properly the armies that the United States recruits from its civilian population in emergencies. Moreover, the internal combustion engines so important in powering tanks, planes, and other war machines, require large quantities of tin alloys for bearings and for soldering. These considerations, along with the fact that Malaya, historically, has been the leading source of tin to the United States, make the kind of information that Mr. Hughes has presented so ably. a matter of vital interest. Your Chairman, Mr. Romanowitz, in his introduction, referred to the fact that I had been a member of the United States delegations to the three meetings of the International Tin Study Group. Some comments on the Group's objectives and deliberations may be of interest. When it appeared that the International Tin Committee, the prewar producer's cartel, might soon revive its operations and extend its control agreement beyond the expiration date of Dec. 31, 1946, the United States Government became interested in some kind of an international trade organization concerned with tin which would give the consumers' interest equal representation with the producers' interests. An international meeting was called in London in October 1946 to consider this problem. I did not attend that meeting hut the result of the meeting was the organization of the International 'Tin Study Group which

Jan 1, 1950

Discussion of the paper of George K. Burgess, J. J. Crowe, H. S. Rawdon, and R. G. Waltenberg, Finishing Temperatures and Properties of Rails. By Albert Sauveur, R. Trimble, William R. Webster, P. H. Dudley, George B. Waterhouse, M. H. Wickhorst, James Aston, E. F. Kenney, A. W. Gibbs, W. A. Aiken, and G. K. Burgess . . 767 Discussion of the paper of Albert Sauveur, Manganese Steel and the Allotropic Theory. By G. K. Burgess and J. E. Stead 787 Discussion of the paper of J. V. Emmons, The Surface Decarbonization of Tool Steel. By Albert Sauveur, Bradley Stoughton, E. G. Spilsbury, Oliver W. Storey, H. O. Hofman, and J. V..Emmons 790 Discussion of the paper of Richard H. Rice, Turbo Blowers for Blast-Furnace Blowing. By S. G. Valentine, W. McA. Johnson, L. Iversen, J. E. Johnson, Jr., Karl Nibecker, W. Trinks, Otto Banner, H. S. Braman, Arthur G. McKee, and Richard H. Rice . . . 794 Discussion of the paper of J. K. Furst, The Plant of the Duplex Process for Making Steel. By W. McA. Johnson, Arthur G. McKee, Henry D. Hubard, and Bradley Stoughton . . 810 Discussion of the paper of E. C. Harder, The Iron Industry in Brazil. By I. C. White and E. C. Harder 813

Jan 4, 1915