Bridgeport Paper - A Uniform Method for the Assay of Copper Materials for Gold and Silver (see Discussion, p. 872)

In Great Britain all analytical chemists are styled assayers, but in the United states a slight distinction is made, assayers being considered those analytical chemists who have chiefly to do with the determination of the precious metals. There have grown up around the assayers of precious metals a number of customs and traditions which, as a rule, do not fetter American chemists when called upon to determine the composition or constituents of any samples submitted to them for analysis. In Great Britain, on the other hand, trade-customs even go to the extent of enforcing the employment of an admittedly erroneous atomic weight in certain alkali-determinations. If the American chemist is asked to determine the amount of lime in a water, potash in an alkali, or silica in an ore, the owner of the sample does not presume to suggest what method he shall employ, nor does he question his report on the ground that he should employ another method. But even in America it is different with the assayer. Unfortunately for the guild, as well as for those who have to base business operations on the reports of assayers, customs and traditions as well as divergent interests seek to circumscribe him in his choice of method and sometimes dictate how he shall perform his operations. This was true at one time of copper, which to-day in England is still determined by the so-called Cornish fire-assay, an attempt to imitate in the laboratory the various metallurgical operations in the smelting-works; but nowhere in this country is the assayer forced to employ any particular method for determining copper so long as his certificate indicates the true total percentage of copper in the sample. It is true that both buyers and sellers demand use of the electrolytic method, but only because it is the most accurate. In America the trade accepts the assayer's statement as final, and makes