Bridgeport Paper - The Inaccuracy of the Commercial Assay for Silver and of Metallurgical Statistics in Silver-Mills, with Special Reference to the Treatment of Roasted Ores by Amalgamation and by the Russell Process (see Discussion, p. 8

The purpose of this paper is to convince the managers of silvermills that their customary reports in regard to the percentage of silver saved are far from the truth. It may be unpleasant for them to have the proofs of this fact brought before the public, and for this rezson the author refrains from giving the names of the mines and mills from which the statistics here recorded were obtained. It may be asked: What is gained by informing the stockholders of our silver-mines that they receive incorrect reports? Will this increase their dividends or lessen their assessments? In the first place, it is always better to publish honest facts than fiction. In the second place, many superintendents believe in the correctness of their reports, and have no idea how much they deceive themselves. Finally, the knowledge that hitherto unexpected losses of silver take place may lead to the adoption of methods by which these losses are greatly reduced. These remarks refer also to smelting-works. The present paper, however, is concerned exclusively with amalgamation and lixiviation. The first and most important error is found in the inaccuracy of the commercial assay; the second in the incorrect sampling of tailings in amalgamation. Further, mills not doing custom-work, but reducing exclusively ores from mines to which the mills belong, are in the habit of weighing the ore only approximately and without making moisture-tests. Thus, a correct basis for calculating the actual percentage of silver extracted is lacking. The superintendent, then, finds it convenient to report the apparent extraction, i.e., the extraction indicated by comparing the value of the roasted ore, minus soluble salts, with the value of the tailings. How many errors are thereby committed it is not necessary to point out.