METEORITES OF NORTH AMERICA. 285 



solution was complete. Sulphur was weighed as barium sulphate. Phosphorus was determined by Eggertz's method 

 as phosphomolybdate, the quantity being too small to allow of a magnesium pyrophosphate determination. Iron 

 was separated by one ammonia and three basic acetate and one final ammonia precipitation. Manganese was separated 

 by the sodium acetate method. Copper, cobalt, and nickel were precipitated as sulphides in acetic acid solution, 

 cobalt and nickel separated by potassium nitrite, and all weighed from electrolytic deposition. Carbon was determined 

 in an independent sample by oxidation in chromic acid after the method described by Blair. 

 The analysis gave the following results: 



Fe 90.56 



Ni 7.71 



Co 1.07 



Cu 0. 14 



Mn Trace. 



p 0.24 



C 0.01 



S 0.025 



Si 0. 006 



Insoluble 0.09 



99.85 

 Omitting silicon and insoluble matter the analysis indicates that the meteorite has the following mineralogical 

 composition: 



Nickel iron (Fe, Ni, Co, Cu, Mn) 97.98 



Schreibersite 1-55 



Cohenite 0. 15 



Troilite 0.07 



99.75 



As the locality where the meteorite was found may be said in e. certain sense to be in the vicinity of Toluca, it 

 becomes an important question from the standpoint of the collector to determine whether the specimen is to be regarded 

 a portion of the Toluca fall. Los Reyes is about 40 miles (62 km. ) in a direct line east of Toluca. It is the little station 

 at the southern end of Lake Texcoco where the Morelos division of the Interoceanic Railway joins the main line, about 

 12 miles southeast of the City of Mexico. On the same line of railroad 25 miles from the City of Mexico is the town of 

 Ameca-Ameca where the find of another iron meteorite has been reported by Castillo. Castillo classes this iron with 

 the Toluca meteorites, and describes the "zone" of Toluca meteorites as extending from Ameca-Ameca on the east to 

 Xiquipilco in the valley of Toluca [on the west]. If Castillo is right in this conclusion the Los Reyes meteorite comes 

 within this zone, as Los Reyes is some 15 miles (23 km.) nearer Toluca than Ameca-Ameca. Castillo unfortunately 

 gives no description of the Ameca-Ameca meteorite by which its resemblance or otherwise to the known specimens 

 from Toluca can be determined. He simply describes it as a "small nodule of meteoric iron found in the village [of 

 that name] and now preserved in the National Museum of Mexico." If it is correct thus to group the Ameca-Ameca 

 meteorite (and hence Los Reyes) with Toluca, a distribution of 50 or 60 miles at least must be conceded to this fall, 

 Ixtlahuaca and Xiquipilco, the two localities in the Valley of Toluca where many of the Toluca meteorites are found, 

 being 10 miles farther from Ameca-Ameca than Toluca itself. It will be remembered that Fletcher, after a careful 

 study of Mexican meteorites with especial regard to the supposed occurrence of widespread meteoritic showers, reached 

 a negative conclusion as regards the wide extent of such showers, this opinion being similar to one in regard to such 

 showers in general which he had expressed in an earlier paper. According to Fletcher the distribution of the Toluca 

 meteorites as they have been reported from localities distant from Toluca was probably due to human agency. With 

 reference to the Ameca-Ameca meteorite he states that ' ' Ameca-Ameca is a town where there are now iron foundries, 

 and where plows, castings, smoothing irons, mill wheels, and other articles are manufactured," to show that Toluca 

 iron might have been carried there for manufacturing purposes. With regard to this report of the state of manufacturing 

 enterprises in Ameca-Ameca, I fear that the distinguished authority of the British Museum has been misinformed, for 

 I have spent weary days in the town without having learned of the existence of such industry. 



The fact brought out by Fletcher to the effect that no known meteorite shower has a greater distribution than 

 16 miles is a more important one in the study of this case, and the evidence at hand in this instance is hardly sufficient 

 to enable us to assert that the Toluca shower had a wider extent. 



The meteorite may of course have reached Los Reyes by the agency of man, but on the whole the indications are 

 that it fell where it was found. The statements of the finders were plain and simple, the meteorite bears no marka 

 showing any attempt to use it for economic purposes, and the price at which it was purchased was lower than any one - 

 who had brought it from Toluca would probably have sold it for. If the iron fell where it was found it is important to 

 determine whether it was an independent fall or whether its resemblance to known Toluca irons is sufficient to make 

 it probable that it fell at the time of the Toluca shower. Here again no positive evidence is at hand, but the chances 

 are, in my opinion, in favor of the latter conclusion. The meteorite certainly does not differ sufficiently from known 

 Toluca irons so that its independent origin can be asserted, and on the whole it resembles them considerably. Pub- 

 lished analyses of Toluca irons give percentages varying somewhat widely, within which limits the Los Reyes values 



