Search Documents

[Pumps: oil-well: plunger: essential parts, G26, 130; 74, 828 improved type, 74, 846 leakage, 74, 837 operating cycle, 74, 833 Uren design, G26, 145 sucker-rod failures, G26, 136 sucker-rod stress, 74, 835 sucker rods, 74, 830, 832 tubing, 74, 833 tubing difficulties, G25, 138; 74, 836 Olivite, 73, 337 valve and seats, 74, 832 Punching: Monel metal, 78, 86 nickel, 78, 86 Punjab. See Indian Empire. PUPIN, M. L biography, M26, 113 John Fritz medalist, 1931, M81, 499 recipient of Washington Award, M28, 155 PURDY, R.: Discussions: on Relative Efficiencies of Domestic Fuels in Relation to Their Costs and Their Advantages 108, 353 on Uses on Coal in the Ceramic Industry, 108,389,398]

Jan 1, 1936

By Alfred R. Powell

LATE in 1944 a group of petroleum and coal technologists was organized in Wash¬ington under the sponsorship of the Petroleum Administration for War and the U. S. Bureau of Mines. This group, known as the Technical Oil Mission, was placed under the authority of the Technical Industrial Intelligence Committee of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, which was then promoting the organization of other missions to be sent to Germany to obtain technical information regarding various industries in that country. The objective of the Technical Oil Mission was to obtain technical data on German production of synthetic oil from coal and all other commercial practices and research projects connected with the oil industry. The primary purpose was to obtain such data as were immediately essential to assist the war against Germany and Japan, with secondary emphasis on technical information that would assist American industry after the end of the war. Since oil-production facilities in Ger¬many and the occupied countries con¬trolled by Germany were the top targets for strategic bombing, the Technical Oil Mission was the first group under the Technical Industrial Intelligence Com¬mittee to enter Germany. A few members of the group flew to London in February 1945 and the majority of the remainder followed in March. In London they were joined by an equal number of British investigators and the combined, mission was then sent into Germany under the authority of the Combined Intelligence Objectives Subcommittee (CIOS). A sum¬mary of the more important information gained by this combined British and American mission is presented below. GERMAN OIL PRODUCTION The oil available to Germany, both natural and synthetic, and including pro¬duction from occupied countries, reached a peak in late 1943 and early 1944. Pro¬duction at this time was at the rate of 1,200,000 metric tons per month, equiva¬lent to i00,000,000 bbl. per year, or about 7 per cent of the wartime production in the United States. Of this production, 50 per cent was crude oil from Romania and Hungary, 12 per cent was crude oil from Germany itself, including Austria, 9 per cent com¬prised coal-carbonization products, that is, tar and light oil, and only the remaining 29 per cent was synthetic liquid fuel made from coal or tar. Synthetic liquid fuel made in Germany was equivalent therefore to less than 2 per cent of war¬time production of crude oil in the United States. The success of the strategic bombing campaign against German oil-production facilities is demonstrated by the fact that by September 1944 the Ploesti fields of Romania and much of the syn¬thetic oil production had been eliminated, so that the amount of oil available to the German war machine was only 25 per cent of the peak quantity mentioned above. By early 1945, when the combined British and American oil mission was entering

Jan 1, 1946

By RAYMOND M. LARSEN

The area covered by this paper is the same as that covered in 1944. Colorado, Montana, Utah, and Wyoming are included in the discussion and statistics, and brief mention is made of activities in the adjoining states, except Nebraska and New Mexico, which are considered separately (see pp. 187-189). The other adjoining states, North and South Dakota, Arizona, Nevada, and Idaho, have had virtually no oil or gas production, except in the gas field of Cedar Creek. Montana, which extends into North Dakota; the Pierre field in South Dakota, where gas is produced and separated in gas-water wells, and the abandoned Payette area in western Idaho. Seven gas wells were drilled in North Dakota, but no wildcatting was reported. Several unsuccessful wildcats were drilled in South Dakota, and some were continuing at the end of the year. Activity in Idaho and Nevada was negligible.

Jan 1, 1946

By Fred A. Hale

Owing to the large area included in the Yellow Pine mining district, and the varied nature of its mineral deposits, a detailed geological description of the district could be covered only in an extensive monograph. This paper is intended as a description of the most prominent geologic features only with special reference to those of economic importance. The first mention of the district was in 1903 by J. E. Spurr, who briefly describes the structural geology of the Spring Mountain range. In 1906, H. F. Bain2 briefly described the Potosi mine. James J. Hillla of the United States Geological Survey, visited the district for a brief period in 1912, the result of which is an excellent reconnaissance report, covering the district in some detail but necessarily with brevity. Since that time, articles covering special features of the district have appeared in the technical press, including some by the writer, and a notable description of the Boss mine, by Adolph Knopf,4 appeared in 1915. Development of the district during the past few years has progressed so rapidly and with so many notable discoveries, particularly with reference to the rare metals, that a further description at this time may prove of interest. The writer's acquaintance with the district is based on 7 years' continuous residence in the vicinity, beginning with the spring of 1910. A. Location and Topography The Yellow Pine mining district is situated in the southwestern portion of Clark County, Nevada, about 300 miles northeast of Los Angeles, along the line of the Los Angeles & Salt Lake Railroad. The district extends from Mt. Olcott on the north to the California line on the south,

Jan 1, 1918

By W. R. Ingalls

DUPING the last two years, and especially during the last six months, a number of important articles upon the new methods for the desulphurization of galena have been published in the technical periodicals, particularly in the Engineering and Mining Journal and in Metallurgie. I proposed for these methods the type-name of "lime-roasting" of galena as a convenient metallurgical classification,' and this term has found some acceptance. The articles referred to have shown the great practical importance of these new processes, and the general recognition of their metallurgical and commercial value which has already been accorded to them. It is my present purpose to review broadly the changes developed by them in the metallurgy of lead, in which connection it is necessary to refer briefly to the previous state of the art. The elimination of the sulphur-content of galena has been always the most troublesome part of the smelting-process, being both costly in the operation and wasteful of silver and lead. Previous to the introduction of the Huntington-Heberlein process at Pertusola, Italy, it was effected by a variety of methods. In the treatment of non-argentiferous galena concentrate, the smelting was done by the roast-reduction method (roasting in reverberatory furnace and smelting in blast-furnace); the roast-reaction method, applied in reverberatory furnaces; and the roast-reaction method, applied in Scotch hearths 2 Precipitation-smelting, simple, had practically gone out of use, although its reactions enter into the modern blast-furnace practice, as do also those of the roast-reaction method.

Sep 1, 1906

By F. R. Koeberlin

ABOUT thirty miles south of the port of Coquimbo, Chile, nestling in one of the western outliers of the main Andes range, lies the little mining town of Andacollo, a place whose history and traditions make up one of the most romantic pages in the life story of this southern republic. The beginning of Andacollo is shrouded in the penumbra of the pre-Columbian era, but its first mining activity probably dates from about the years 1440 to 1460. It was in the middle of the fifteenth century that the Inca Tupac-Yupanqui, grandfather of Atahualpa, conquered this part of Chile. His domain extended even as far south as the present site of Santiago, and perhaps farther, but was maintained with increasing difficulty against the fiercely independent and indomitable tribes of Araucanian Indians of the South.

Jan 1, 1938

Jan 1, 1969

By Y. Oka, H. Majima

When a rock particle is subjected to an external force, internal stresses and deformations are experienced by the particle. Assuming that the breakage of a rock is mainly due to tensile stresses generated by the action of a pair of concentrated loads, F, directed in compression towards the loading points at the shortest distance, as illustrated in Fig. 1, the stress and deformation experienced by a particle of irregular shape can be determined with the aid of the theory of elasticity. According to the photoelastic experiments made by one of the present authors,' the stress states in a rock particle of irregular shape are quite similar to that of an inscribed sphere of diameter x, as indicated in Fig. 1, but accompanied by the faint stresses, in the vicinity of the particle outside of the inscribed sphere. Therefore, the stress components in an irregularly shaped particle can be estimated by referring to stress components in a sphere. Applying polar spherical coordinates to an elastic spherical body, as shown in Fig. 1, the stress components are all expressed as multiples of F /x2 and more or less influenced by the loading angle and Poisson's number m. In general, the energy w, acting on a rock particle is defined as the product of loading compression F

Jan 1, 1970

By F. W. Maclennan

The following is a list of members who died in 1929. It is compiled from reports to the Secretary's office. Biographical sketches published in Mining and Metallurgy are indicated in the last two columns. Issue Containing Year of Date of Biography Election Name Death 1929 Page 1922 Adams, Waldo Peck................................ June 2 September 435 1903 Argall, Joseph.................................... Nov. 1 1894 Austin, Leonard S................................. Oct. 30 December 580 1905 Bailed, Melbourne.........................Dec. 12 May* 280 1890 Barringer, Daniel M.............................. Nov. 30 February* 119 1895 Batchelleb, HENRr R.............................. Jan. 15 March 167 BINGHAM Charles E............................. 1923 Bibkett, E. H..................................... Apr. 23 August 394 1913 Bibbell, Robert W................................. Jan. 18 April 214 1926 Blackmar, Don C.................................. June 4 March* 189 1920 Bosworth, T. O.................................... Jan. 18 April 214 1894 Boucher, Arthur S..........................Jan. 6 May 257 1927 Brandenthaler, R. R.............................. Dec. 14 January* 64 1889 Bretherton, S. E............................... Oct. 4 December 581 1911 Brunton, F. K................ .. Aug. 17 1924 Brush, Charles F................................. June 15 September 436 1925 Cameron, Frank N........................May 16 July 349 1891 Chambers, Robert E.............................. May July 348 1908 Clark, J. Murray................................. Dec. 3 August* 407 1883 Clymer, edward T............................. Oct. 13 December 579 1914 Cofpey, George T................................. May 8 July 349 1901 Cooke, L. H....................................... Aug. 23 November 537 1915 Cousins, George W........................ June 30 February* 118 1886 Cowles, A. H...................................... Aug. 13 September 436 1892 Crane, Theron I............................. Nov. 2 December 579 1921 Crowell, Samuel B................................ Dec. 9 January* 64 1907 Curtis, Bracey.................................... Jan. 31 April 215 1895 de Batz, Rene........ ............... January March* 189 1928 Dines, Tyson S.................................... March May 257 1909 Dufourco, R. G............................. January November 537 1920 Ericsson, Eric A.................................. Apr. 4 April* 231 1920 Erlenborn, Willi....................... Nov. 10 March* 189 1888 Farish, John B.................................... Nov. 14 December 580 1891 Ferguson, Vincent........................... Mar. 8 May 257 1917 Finucane, T. R.................................... Mar. 22 February* 118 1921 Foch, Ferdinand................................... Mar. 20 1885 Foucar, Edouard I....................... Jan. 3 March 167 1880 Francklyn, Charles G............................. Jan. 11 April 214 1925 Friedl, Arthur J.............................. July 9 September 435 1894 Fuller, James W. Jr............................... April 4 1876 . Goodale, Charles W.............................. April 11 May 258 1912 Graybill, John..........................Dec. 11 June* 320 1887 Gritzner, F. A.................................. Mar. 26 July 394 1906 Gunther, C. Godfrey.............................. Deo. 26 February* 118 1900 Haggen, Edward A.............................. Apr. 22 October 488 1895 Hall, Benjamin M........................Nov. 19 March* 189 1913 Harper, Walter S................................. Feb. 15 August 394 1921 Hawley, William S................................ Apr. 20 June 298 1920 Herd, Walter ... . . . ..... Aug. 23 September 435 1889 Holt, Marmadtjke B............................... Dec. 26 February* 118 1928 Husk, Albert D .... ................June 9 December 580 1920 Hutchinson, S. Pemberton......................... Feb. 16 April 214 1926 Ivanoff, Constantine L............................ Mar. 7 June 298 1914 Jaeger, Frederick..... .............July 28 October 488 1891 Jennings, Robert E.......................Oct. 30 December 580 1922 Johnson, Homar L................................. Sept. 17 October 483 1927 Johnson, Homer H................................. Mar. 21 May 257 1918 Jones, Jesse L ..... ...............Jan. 22 April 214 1892 Jones, Thomas J................................... June 18 October 488 1883 JoOet, Cavalier H................................. Mar. 29 May 258 1881 Kennedy, John S . . . . ... ..........Apr. 22 August 394 1881 Kennedy,- Hugh.................................... May 23 September 435 1895 Kebvin, James H................................... September October 488 1926 Kkom, L. J........................................ Dec. 24 January* 64 1905 La Follette, Harvey M........................... Sept. 19 November 538 1920 MacDonald, Alexander............................ May August 394 1904 Marengo, Paolo................................... May 257 1925 Maxwell, Allison R............................... May 7 November 538

Jan 1, 1930

By Maurice Magee

The Ducktown ore deposits have been known, explored, and mined for 120 years. Eight massive sulfide ore bodies occur in highly folded and metamorphosed graywacke, graywacke conglomerate, mica schist, chloritegarnet schist, and staurolite schist of Precambrian age. The ore deposits are tabular bodies that have been extensively folded, generally conform to the enclosing rocks, but show local complex differences. The ore deposits, ranging in size from 250,000 tons to over 20 million tons, are composed principally of the minerals pyrrhotite, pyrite, chalcopyrite, sphalerite, and magnetite. Gangue minerals are quartz, calcite, actinolite, tremolite, hornblende, garnet, and masses of schistose wall- rock. Three fault systems are present that have influenced ore control and ore body configuration. Hydrothermal effects are evident in wall-rock alteration. Evidence of retrograde metamorphism is extensive in the wall and ore associated rock. Preliminary isotopic age dates have indicated four possible metamorphic events during the Paleozoic Era. Ore genesis is considered to be hydrothermal replacement of receptive beds, predominantly highly calcareous zones, quartzitic zones, and brecciated shear zones. Ore deposition is thought to have occurred during the Devonian Period, with later mobilization and recrystallization of the ore and gangue during Middle and Late Paleozoic times.

Jan 1, 1968

By C. W. Davis

THE name fuller's earth, which was derived from its early use in "fulling" or removing grease from woolen goods, is a term that is generally considered to designate mineral matter, containing hydrous aluminum silicates of the clay group, which has a high capacity for removing colors from oils, whether of animal, vegetable, or mineral origin. Fuller's earths are usually dried and may be "tempered" by heating or may be treated with water or reagents to improve their efficiency. For our purpose the term "acid-treated earths" will include those products from the partial decomposition of mineral water by acid which are equal to or more efficient than an untreated fuller's earth from Quincy, Fla., when used in bleaching mineral oil by the "contact" process. In general, the contact process for treating oils consists of heating and agitating a mixture of oil and finely divided adsorbent, the latter being subsequently removed by filtration. The term "adsorbent" is used because, although there has been a great deal of controversy over the mechanism of removal of impurities from oils by mineral matter, there is no doubt that adsorption, which involves the surface of the solid, plays a major part.1 The properties that make fuller's earth useful in the treatment of petroleum products by "percolation" and in the purification of edible oils by the contact process have long been studied, but the comparatively recent adaptation of the contact process to the bleaching of petroleum products has made desirable the further investigation of fuller's earth and other adsorbent earths.

Jan 1, 1929

By D. L. H. Forbes

(New York Meeting, February, 1912.) Introduction.. THE application of the cyanide process to complex sulphide ores for the extraction of their bold and silver is no longer a novelty, but, as an example showing modern tendencies in this direction, the following description of the new milling process at the Lucky-Tiger mine is offered: The extraordinary richness of the ore in the upper workings of this mine made any thought of milling in its early hays seen unnecessary. Its location in an almost inaccessible part of the rugged mountains just south of the Arizona boundary-line, and 60 miles from the town of Douglas, made the expense of bringing in machinery and supplies a very serious consideration. But, after the property had been shipping high-grade ore on mule-back for a few years, there remained in the mine a considerable tonnage of vein-matter that was too low in value to ship, but which it was thought could be milled near the mine at a profit. The first milling-experiment consisted in the installation of Nissen stamps in conjunction with concentrating-tables and Frue vanners, but, as the ore from the upper workings contained most of its silver in the form of cerargyrite, this type of mill was not successful. The proximity of the mine to the great copper-concentrating mills of Cananea and Moctezuma naturally made the influence of copper-milling, ideas felt in the company's next installation. At considerable expense a stage-crushing concentrating-mill, with a capacity of 100 tons per day, was built. This mill was modeled along the lines of the most approved practice in copper-concentrators at that time, the main idea being that crushing by stages in rolls was necessary in order to prevent losses from ?sliming." Largely owing to the fact that, when the mill

Aug 1, 1912

By H. K. VAN POOLLEEN, W. Hurst, H. C. Bixel

In an earlier publication* I showed the development of the instantaneous point source solution for a well producing at a constant rate at the center of a system of two radial, adjoining sands of different permeabilities. I also showed how a wellbore radius could be incorporated if this were the development required. For the purpose of that paper and the point I wished to make, this solution served. It yielded a simplifying solution of sands in series identified by Eqs. VI-26 and VI-27. (These equations are reproduced in part by Bixel and van Poollen as their Eq. 3, Page 302.) I am well aware that the simplified solutions are approximations. The facts that these Ei-functions satisfy the diffusivity equation and meet the boundary conditions both at the well and at the interface between sands, and that the earliest time considerations yield zero pressure drop, are evidence that the solutions are good approximations. This was the purpose for these formulas, which I interpret that where the permeabilities are of finite order of magnitudes in the respective media, the relations give satisfactory answers. However, from the authors' point of view there are reservations, which leads me to consider their entire generalization as illustrated in their Figs. 1 through 14. What I understand from their storage capacity, relationship Fs, which is the ratio of the product of porosity and compressibility of Sand II to Sand I, that is employed here by the authors as a correlative means of identifying one figure from another, there is nothing in the exact mathematics that supports such a term as a means of correlation. This is taken out of context, unsustained that this applies. Here the mathematics are known, where the true correlation is the diffusivity term of one sand to another. This entails permeability that refers back again to the term M in their paper for the transmis-sibility of fluid from one sand to the other that should have also been a part of this storage capacity. In Figs. 8 through 14, which purported to show the simplified equation following this correlation, there are apparent discontinuities for M equal to or less than 0.1000 that differ from the trends for greater values of M. In this connection there is no reference radius given for this cumulative pressure drop in the paper that would permit me to make these calculations. However, what is clear for M equal to 0.1000 or less we are treated to almost a closed barrier at the interface; a condition entered by the writers without qualification. This across-the-board treatment of these simplified formulas, whatever the motive of the authors, enters into a range of permeabilities that even I as the contributor would have reservations that such could apply. Under comparable conditions I would be looking at a closed reservoir or some facsimile for such. The extent to which the approximation or the exact equations pertain is not evident in the generality offered by Bixel and van Poollen in their paper. Only when they or other writers show the comparison of the pressure distributions within the formations can one be able to judge the rational limits to subscribe to the simplified formulas.

Jan 1, 1969

By Frederic P. Dewey

(New York Meeting, February, 1912.) By the old method of determining platinum in ores and bullion, the silver-alloy first obtained in the regular course of assay is parted in strong sulphuric acid and the residual metal weighed. This is re-alloyed with silver by a second cupellation and parted in nitric acid, the residual metal being again weighed. Any difference shown between the two weighings is assumed to be, and is called; platinum. Sometimes it is so, and if any considerable amount of platinum be present, there will be a decided difference between the two weighings; but a slight difference is no real evidence whatever of the presence of platinum. On the other hand, the second weight may equal or possibly exceed the first, even when traces of platinum are present. Again, other members of the platinum group may go into solution in nitric acid more or less. If present, these would be called platinum and escape detection. The method does not provide any direct tests whatever as to the presence or absence of platinum. It is often indecisive, and sometimes jives erroneous results. It is, therefore, quite unsatisfactory. Being called upon many times to determine platinum in a wide variety of materials, particularly when present in very small amounts, I have realized the disadvantages and defects of this old method. In an article on the solubility of gold in nitric acid, 1 I have briefly outlined a method of gathering a little gold out of a solution containing much silver, which furnishes the basis of

Apr 1, 1912

By Jasper L. Stuckey

PYROPHYLLITE, first identified as soapstone,1 later as agalmatolite,2 and finally as pyrophyllite,3 has been known to occur in North Carolina for more than 130 years and has been produced intermittently in commercial amounts for the past 100 years. Pyrophyllite mining, however, has become a major industry in North Carolina only during the past 25 years. North Carolina and California are the chief producing states. Current annual production averages 125,000 tons, of which slightly more than 90 pct comes from North Carolina. Distribution and Geologic Setting: All known pyrophyllite deposits in North Carolina are associated with rocks of the Carolina Slate Belt,4 which is composed of a vast series of metamorphosed volcanic and sedimentary materials, occurring as two zones extending in a northeast-southwest direction across the state. The larger of these zones, lying in the central Piedmont region, varies from 8 to 50 miles wide. The smaller zone lies along the eastern edge of the Piedmont region and is partly covered by coastal plain sediments.

Jan 1, 1958

By J. D. A. Morrow

TO my mind the National Bituminous Coal Act so far has proved one of the unhappiest experiences that has ever befallen the bituminous coal operators of the United States. Viewed in the light of its ugly consequences everyone should recognize this measure for what it is -a weird thing as unreal as a page from "Alice in Wonderland." Indeed it might be another stanza to the tale of the Walrus and the Carpenter, with the coal operators in the role of the unfortunate oysters who were taken on that memorable ramble. It is time that coal producers open their eyes, jerk themselves out of any lingering hypnotic optimism about the price-fixing provisions of this law, demand the repeal of these corroding clauses, and then set about remedying as best they can the disastrous effects of this retromingent scheme to regulate the coal business.

Jan 1, 1939

By Zay Jeffries

Rearmament superimposed on buying sprees by the public, caused a general shortage of metals in 1911. and the rare metals were no exception; they also shared with the more common metals the uncertainty of future demand. In general, the apparent undersupply of metals is a favorable condition for the realization of sleeping possibilities of the rare metals, especially if the supply can he made sufficient to take care of the possible new demand. Many changes in metal usage in 1941 were forced because of shortages. When such changes are in the direction of the economic trend there is a speeding up in the tempo of the inevitable change, but when the forced changes are against the economic trend they are likely to be shortlived. In any event, the latter is not a solid foundation on which to build a future business.

Jan 1, 1942

By J. C. Reed, J. M. Hansell

Cinnabar was discovered in southwestern Arkansas on Little Missouri River in sec. 1, T.7S., R.26W., in April, 1930, and near Antoine Creek in sec. 28, T.6S., R.23W., some 15 miles farther east in May of the same year. It was not, however, until June, 1931, that cinnabar was identified as such in a specimen from the original discovery area sent to W. M. Weigell by Walter F. Hintze of Murfreesboro. Almost simultaneously2, in July, 1931, Moritz Norden of Hot Springs identified specimens from the Antoine Creek area as cinnabar. Immediate interest in the district followed the identification of cinnabar and by January, 1932, the district was known to extend as a mineralized belt about one mile wide trending east-northeast from sec. 13, T.7S., R.27W., in Howard County across central Pike County and into Clark County to sec. 19, T.6S., R.23W., thence extending southeast into sections 33 and 34 of the same township. Since then, cinnabar has been found in sec. 6, T.7S., R.22W., thus giving a total east-west length to the district of approximately 30 miles. Interest focused mainly on the two discovery areas, with the result that mining development has progressed most rapidly in those localities. In the Antoine Creek area the Arkansas Quicksilver Co. has done considerable exploration work and has retorted the high-grade ore so obtained. In the Little Missouri area the Southwestern Quicksilver Co. has had a 12-ton rotary furnace in more or less continuous operation since April, 1932, and has been the largest producer in the district. In March, 1934, the United States Geological Survey began a study of the Arkansas quicksilver district, which was made possible by an allotment of funds from the Public Works Administration. Until

Jan 1, 1935

By J. C. Reed, J. M. Hansell

Cinnabar was discovered in southwestern Arkansas on Little Missouri River in sec. 1, T.7S., R.26W., in April, 1930, and near Antoine Creek in sec. 28, T.6S., R.23W., some 15 miles farther east in May of the same year. It was not, however, until June, 1931, that cinnabar was identified as such in a specimen from the original discovery area sent to W. M. Weigell by Walter F. Hintze of Murfreesboro. Almost simultaneously2, in July, 1931, Moritz Norden of Hot Springs identified specimens from the Antoine Creek area as cinnabar. Immediate interest in the district followed the identification of cinnabar and by January, 1932, the district was known to extend as a mineralized belt about one mile wide trending east-northeast from sec. 13, T.7S., R.27W., in Howard County across central Pike County and into Clark County to sec. 19, T.6S., R.23W., thence extending southeast into sections 33 and 34 of the same township. Since then, cinnabar has been found in sec. 6, T.7S., R.22W., thus giving a total east-west length to the district of approximately 30 miles. Interest focused mainly on the two discovery areas, with the result that mining development has progressed most rapidly in those localities. In the Antoine Creek area the Arkansas Quicksilver Co. has done considerable exploration work and has retorted the high-grade ore so obtained. In the Little Missouri area the Southwestern Quicksilver Co. has had a 12-ton rotary furnace in more or less continuous operation since April, 1932, and has been the largest producer in the district. In March, 1934, the United States Geological Survey began a study of the Arkansas quicksilver district, which was made possible by an allotment of funds from the Public Works Administration. Until

Jan 1, 1935

Cinnabar was discovered in southwestern Arkansas on Little Missouri River in sec. 1, T.7S., R.26W., in April, 1930, and near Antoine Creek in sec. 28, T.6S., R.23W., some 15 miles farther east in May of the same year. It was not, however, until June, 1931, that cinnabar was identified as such in a specimen from the original discovery area sent to W. M. Weigell by Walter F. Hintze of Murfreesboro. Almost simultaneously2, in July, 1931, Moritz Norden of Hot Springs identified specimens from the Antoine Creek area as cinnabar. Immediate interest in the district followed the identification of cinnabar and by January, 1932, the district was known to extend as a mineralized belt about one mile wide trending east-northeast from sec. 13, T.7S., R.27W., in Howard County across central Pike County and into Clark County to sec. 19, T.6S., R.23W., thence extending southeast into sections 33 and 34 of the same township. Since then, cinnabar has been found in sec. 6, T.7S., R.22W., thus giving a total east-west length to the district of approximately 30 miles. Interest focused mainly on the two discovery areas, with the result that mining development has progressed most rapidly in those localities. In the Antoine Creek area the Arkansas Quicksilver Co. has done considerable exploration work and has retorted the high-grade ore so obtained. In the Little Missouri area the Southwestern Quicksilver Co. has had a 12-ton rotary furnace in more or less continuous operation since April, 1932, and has been the largest producer in the district. In March, 1934, the United States Geological Survey began a study of the Arkansas quicksilver district, which was made possible by an allotment of funds from the Public Works Administration. Until

Jan 1, 1935