Rôle Of Secondary Enrichment In Genesis Of Butte Chalcocite

The paper has two parts: the field argument and the microscopic argument. The field argument indicates that either the deep chalcocite has replacea sulfide of extraordinarily easy replaceability or it is hypogene. The microscopic argumentindicates that this sulfide, if it existed, must have been hypogene bornite; that this bornite must so excel known bornite in replaceability as to constitute a new variety; that the existence of this new variety is wholly unsupported by evidence; and that the deep Butte chalcocite is therefore hypogene. IN 1900, when the public first heard of "secondary enrichment" the Butte chalcocite seemed clearly supergene. Mining, through successive regions of leached capping, bonanza sulfide, and sulfide less rich, had paused at lean bottom levels which, though chalcocite-bearing, suggested the waning of copper. The deepest chalcocite, at 1500 ft., was yet too shallow to disturb the supergene hypothesis. But, with deeper mining, lean levels yielded to fat ones. Here and there they showed, within the same vein, an inverted distribution, chalcopyrite above and chalcocite below. To the miners' astonishment, they carried chalcocite, unaffected by cross faults, on an independent course to the depth of 2500 ft. The pattern of ore distribution, hitherto revealed only in fragments, was now appearing in perspective, and, in the depth of the chalcocite, was beginning to make Butte differ from all districts where the chalcocite is indubitably supergene. The idea of hypogene origin at length came into favor; by 1913, when Sales1 advocated this origin, the argument had become a powerful one. This argument rested on field evidence; but, already, there was beginning to emerge microscopic evidence not included in this arugment. Especially pertinent was the proof that (1) The deep chalcocite lies in-mixed with bornite, often microscopic; (2) the deep chalcocite often replaces bornite; and (3) replacement of bornite by chalcocite is accom-