﻿Loughlin 
  and 
  Schaller 
  — 
  Crandallite, 
  a 
  New 
  Mineral. 
  69 
  

  

  Art. 
  VIII. 
  — 
  Crandallite, 
  a 
  New 
  Mineral 
  ; 
  by 
  G-. 
  F. 
  

   Loughlin 
  and 
  ~W. 
  T. 
  Schaller.* 
  

  

  Introduction. 
  — 
  To 
  the 
  long 
  list 
  of 
  unusual 
  minerals 
  in 
  the 
  

   Tintic 
  mining 
  district, 
  Utah, 
  which 
  has 
  recently 
  been 
  

   augmented 
  by 
  A. 
  H. 
  Meansf, 
  another 
  is 
  here 
  added 
  — 
  crandal- 
  

   lite, 
  named 
  after 
  Mr. 
  M. 
  L. 
  Crandall, 
  until 
  recently 
  engineer 
  

   for 
  the 
  Knight 
  Syndicate 
  of 
  Provo, 
  Utah, 
  who 
  did 
  much 
  to 
  

   aid 
  in 
  the 
  recent 
  study 
  of 
  the 
  district 
  by 
  the 
  U. 
  S. 
  Geological 
  

   Survey. 
  

  

  Occurrence. 
  — 
  Crandallite 
  is 
  a 
  hydrated 
  phosphate 
  of 
  alumi- 
  

   num 
  and 
  calcium, 
  and 
  has 
  apparently 
  resulted 
  from 
  the 
  altera- 
  

   tion 
  of 
  a 
  pre-existing 
  non-fibrous 
  mineral 
  similar 
  to 
  goyazite;}; 
  

   (hamlinite). 
  The 
  new 
  mineral 
  was 
  found 
  by 
  Mr. 
  Loughlin 
  in 
  

   vein 
  material 
  on 
  the 
  dump 
  of 
  the 
  Brooklyn 
  mine, 
  in 
  the 
  mom 
  

   zonite 
  area 
  of 
  the 
  district 
  \\ 
  miles 
  east 
  of 
  Silver 
  City. 
  The 
  

   mine 
  workings 
  were 
  inaccessible 
  and 
  only 
  a 
  small 
  amount 
  of 
  

   ore 
  was 
  available 
  for 
  study 
  on 
  the 
  dump. 
  In 
  this 
  ore 
  the 
  new 
  

   mineral 
  was 
  very 
  scarce. 
  

  

  Crandallite 
  occurs 
  in 
  compact 
  to 
  cleavable 
  masses 
  without 
  

   distinct 
  crystal 
  outline, 
  and 
  partly 
  fills 
  irregular-shaped 
  cavi- 
  

   ties 
  in 
  a 
  quartz-barite 
  ore 
  aggregate, 
  resting 
  indifferently 
  on 
  

   any 
  of 
  these 
  minerals 
  and 
  to 
  a 
  minor 
  extent 
  replacing 
  them. 
  

   The 
  cavities, 
  some 
  of 
  which 
  are 
  almost 
  completely 
  filled 
  by 
  

   crandallite, 
  measure 
  from 
  a 
  few 
  millimeters 
  to 
  six 
  centimeters 
  

   in 
  diameter. 
  The 
  ore 
  minerals 
  of 
  the 
  vein 
  include 
  principally 
  

   pyrite 
  with 
  considerable 
  enargite 
  and 
  small 
  amounts 
  of 
  galena 
  

   and 
  zinc 
  blende. 
  The 
  crandallite 
  is 
  covered 
  by 
  a 
  crust 
  of 
  

   tenorite 
  half 
  a 
  millimeter 
  thick 
  (partial 
  analysis 
  of 
  impure 
  

   sample 
  gave: 
  CuO, 
  80*12; 
  H 
  2 
  0, 
  4'02 
  ; 
  P 
  2 
  5 
  , 
  1*44; 
  insol., 
  

   2'94), 
  which 
  in 
  turn 
  is 
  coated 
  by 
  a 
  film 
  of 
  greenish 
  copper 
  

   minerals. 
  

  

  According 
  to 
  these 
  relations 
  crandallite 
  is 
  later 
  than 
  the 
  

   undoubted 
  primary 
  (hypogene) 
  minerals 
  of 
  the 
  vein, 
  and 
  

   earlier 
  than 
  the 
  common 
  secondary 
  (supergene) 
  minerals. 
  So 
  

   far 
  as 
  its 
  composition 
  is 
  concerned 
  it 
  may 
  be 
  either 
  the 
  latest 
  

   of 
  the 
  primary 
  or 
  the 
  earliest 
  of 
  the 
  secondary 
  minerals. 
  

  

  The 
  hand 
  specimen 
  suggests 
  that 
  crandallite 
  has 
  a 
  platy 
  

   structure, 
  yielding 
  smooth 
  cleavage 
  surfaces, 
  but 
  when 
  any 
  of 
  

  

  * 
  Published 
  by 
  permission 
  of 
  the 
  Director 
  U. 
  S. 
  Geol. 
  Survey. 
  

  

  f 
  Means, 
  A. 
  H. 
  , 
  Some 
  new 
  mineral 
  occurrences 
  of 
  the 
  Tintic 
  mining 
  dis- 
  

   trict, 
  Utah, 
  this 
  Journal 
  (4), 
  xli, 
  125-130, 
  1916. 
  

  

  % 
  The 
  suggestion 
  was 
  made 
  by 
  W. 
  T. 
  Schaller 
  (ibid., 
  (3), 
  xxxii, 
  359, 
  1911 
  ; 
  

   U. 
  S. 
  Geol. 
  Survey, 
  Bull. 
  509, 
  p. 
  70, 
  3 
  912) 
  that 
  hamlinite 
  was 
  probably 
  

   identical 
  with 
  goyazite. 
  The 
  name 
  goyazite 
  (1884) 
  has 
  priority 
  over 
  the 
  

   perhaps 
  better 
  known 
  name 
  hamlinite 
  (1890) 
  ; 
  Farrington 
  (ibid., 
  xli, 
  358, 
  

   1916) 
  has 
  recently 
  questioned 
  this 
  proposed 
  identity. 
  See 
  paper 
  in 
  the 
  fol- 
  

   lowing 
  number. 
  

  

  