in Norway and in Canada, 15 



of rarer occurrence. The masses of ore appear flattened, 

 almond-shaped, and drawn out parallel with the foliation of 

 the enclosing rock. In the direction of the strike, they thin out, 

 or branch off and disappear. Their average thickness is from 

 two to six yards, but it sometimes reaches twenty yards. The 

 iron works of Ulefoss, Fossum, Froland, Nas and others, are all 

 more or less dependent on these deposits for their ores. The si- 

 tuations of these iron works seem to have been chosen, less with a 

 view to economically transporting the ore, than to taking advan- 

 tage of the magnificent water powers, which exist everywhere in 

 Norway. The fuel is charcoal, mostly from pine, and it has also 

 to be carted considerable distances. The blast furnaces used, are 

 partly similar to those used in Sweden, and partly to those used 

 in Germany. They are thirty feet high, from four to four and a 

 half feet wide at top, and from seven to eight at their widest part. 

 The percentage of metallic iron contained in the mixture to be 

 smelted, ranges from 25 to 42 per cent, and the average production 

 of raw iron from a furnace is 2^ tons daily. l| tons of charcoal 

 are consumed in the production of one ton of iron. The refining 

 takes place on what are called " frisch hearths," and hammers are 

 used in the further mechanical treatment of the resulting lumps of 

 malleable iron. The iron produced, is like the Swedish, celebrated 

 for its purity. It is shipped to Hamburg, and from thence 

 mostly to America. 



Large quantities of titaniferous iron ore occur at Ekersund and 

 Snarum ; that from the former locality contains 43 per cent of ti- 

 tanic acid. Phosphate of lime has also been worked and exported 

 from the neighbourhood of Kragero. With these I must close 

 this sketch of the economical minerals of the primitive gneiss 

 formation of Xorwa}', and turn to compare it in its various features 

 with that of Canada. 



The parallelism of the Laurentian formation of Canada with 

 the gneiss of Scandinavia was long ago pointed out by Sir "William 

 Logan, and in the more recent reports of the Geological Survey, 

 especially those of 1853-56, we find the features of the Canadian 

 formation fully described. The rocks there occurring are essen- 

 tially the same as those of Norway. Keilhau's characteristic 

 gneiss corresponds to the granitic or micaceous gneiss of Canada, 

 and the hornblende gneiss of Norway is the syenitic or hornblen- 

 dic gneiss of the Laurentian formation. Even the e^je gneiss 

 variety appears to exist here, and from the description, to be syno- 



