Discussions - Of Mr. Riter’s Paper on Mine-Survey Notes (see Trans., xli., 790)

E. R. Rice, Wickenburg, Ariz. (communication to the Secretary*):—While this paper is primarily intended as a discussion of Mr. Riter's, I think it will be best to indicate my criticism by describing my own field-methods. It has been my experience that, for ordinary work, the regular transit-book is to be preferred to the card-system for recording notes. This is specially true when computations in the field are required, for it is then necessary to have at hand the total latitudes, departures, ancl elevations. Moreover, the transit-book is easier to carry and manipulate in wet or cramped places, and is not as liable to damage as the loose leaf or card. I use a regular transit-book in the field, and then copy my notes, sketches, etc., in an o5ce-book, entering also the latitudes, departures, and other reductions. These values are then copied into the field-book, securing a duplicate record, in case either book should be lost or mislaid. In the field-book, the notes are entered on the left-hand, and the sketches and remarks on the right-hand page. The next two pages are left blank for the latitudes, departures, bearings, reduced distances, etc. Of course, the notes for the different parts of the mine are entered in the field-book in the order in which they are surveyed; but in the they are entered systematically. It has been my experience that the system of keeping notes used by a surveyor, is particularly adapted to the needs and temperament of the individual. Otherwise, he would not be