Chicago Discussions -Discussion of paper of Mr. Louis (See p . 117)

C. A. Stetefeldt, San Francisco, Cal. (communication to the Secretary): In view of Mr. Louis's statement that the balance and weights employed in his experiment were '(by no means first-rate," the results can scarcely be entitled to weight. And if a slight variation in specific gravity were to be accepted as proof of the existence of allotropic modifications, we should be obliged to conclude that every metal existed in such modifications. When the observed specific gravity of an alloy (as is often, and perhaps generally, the rase) differs from the calculated one, it seems more reasonable to explain the difference (apart from errors of determination) by assuming that actual chemical combination takes place between some atoms of the metals. MR. Louis (communication to the Secretary): In reply to the criticisms with which Mr. Stetefeldt has favored me, I beg to point out to him that, in the first place, I do not myself attach very much weight to the results I have obtained. I merely claim to have pointed out that amorphous gold obtained from dissolving up the alloy with silver has a higher specific gravity than common gold—a result corroborated by the quoted results of Rose. At any rate, it is easy to repeat my observations, and I hope this may be done by men who have better opportunities than myself for this investigation. Surely it is worthy of attention from assayers at the mints. I am not prepared to say that I should regard slight variations in specific gravity as absolute proof of allotropism, but I do consider