370 L. W. McCay— Massive Safflorite. 
advanced in support of the identity of the two minerals proved 
amply convincing, for, shortly after the appearance of the 
pamphlet, Sandberger, in a letter to the editors of the Jahr- 
buch,* distinctly admits his willingness to withdraw his name 
spathiopyrite and to substitute for the same the Breithaupt 
term safflorite. 
In my article upon safflorite, however, I not only concluded, 
in accordance with Breithaupt’s, Sandberger’s and my Ow! 
researches, that there was actually a crystalline rhombic modi- 
fication of speiskobalt, but also that there was undoubtedly a 
massive rhombic modification of this species. Sandberger, 
now, although ready to admit the existence of the crystalline 
modification, i. e. safflorite, calls in question my right to use 
to discover. He further appears to doubt the accuracy of the 
statement which appears so often in Breithaupt’s Paragenesis,t 
to the effect that speiskobalt and safflorite appear together, 
and suggests it as well to examine the specimens belonging to 
the Freiberg collection with the view of discovering what this 
safflorite really is. The specimens from Bieber, Schneeberg, 
Reinerzau and Wittichen. which Sandberger had opportunity 
to examine exhibited no indications of the two minerals occur 
me respecting my reasons for inferring the existence of massive 
ble exception, my language on this point is perfectly ey 
designate all massive varieties of speiskobalt, as Sandberger 
gravity as 70. It isa well established fact that numbers 0 
specimens of massive speiskobalt give specific gravities a 
» We 
that they are, as a general thing, rich in iron. ‘The specile 
gravity of typical smaltine is now about 6°50, conseque? J 
these arsenides cannot be real smaltine, and, since the 1 
+ Die Paragenesis der Mineralien, pp. 222, 223. 
