Discussions - Of Mr. Emmons’s Paper on The Agency of Manganese in the Superficial Alteration and Secondary Enrichment of Gold-Deposits in the United States (see p. 3)

Charles R. Eeyes, Des Moines, Ia. (con~munication to the Secretary*):—It is not in a spirit of criticism that I offer a supplemental suggestion or two on the subjects covered by this valuable and highly instructive memoir. There are two points which, in my opinion, should have received greater emphasis in Mr. Emmons's excellent paper. One is the fundamental r6le played by the chlorides under certain conditions in ore-formation. The other is the possible establishment of geographic relationships among the four pheilomena of (1) excessive chlo-ridic content of mine-waters; (2) the abundance of chloridic compounds of the precious metals; (3) the presence of man-gancse oxides; and (4) the diminishing importance, in ore-genesis, of the metallic sulphates. Although Mr. Emmons's notes refer to gold alone, it may be pertinently asked whether the same principles do not hold good for silver and copper also, since these metals form, together with gold, a distinct and well-known chemical group. That the reactions involved apply equally well to the other two metals mentioned, is sbown by a number of recent observations and discussions. Chloridic ores of silver are, as I have lately endeavored to show, mainly worked in arid or desert regions only; and the great deposits of disseminated copper-ores are similarly characteristic of such regions, in which both classes doubtless owe their formation to the abundance of saline materials derived from desert dusts, and to the plentiful and almost universal presence of manganese oxide. Under these climatic conditions, silver is somewhat more abundantly deposited than copper and gold, because its chloride is so much less soluble. During volcanic emanations, the metallic chlorides perform at all times distinct functions; when these are