228 S* Weidman — Amphibole Hudsonite. 



Hudsonite was later classed by Dana* with pyroxene r 

 although there is no record of a further examination of it. 

 Dana's classification was accepted by Beckf in 1850. 



BrewerJ in 1850 also made an analysis of this mineral with 

 the following result : 



Si0 o 36-94 



A1 2 3 , 11-22 



Fe 2 3 , trace 



FeO 30*03 



MnO 2-24 



CaO 12-71 



MgO 



99-14 



The density of the mineral, according to Brewer, is 3'43 to- 

 3-46. 



In 1853 Smith and Brusbg made two new analyses of the 

 hudsonite, the mineral being supplied by S. R. Horton and 

 being the same, as already stated, as that sent by him to Pro- 

 fessor L. C. Beck. The analyses of Smith and Brush are as- 

 follows : 



Si0 2 - 39-30 



A1 2 3 9-78 



FeO _ 30-40 



MnO -67 



CaO .... 10-39 



MgO -. 2-98 



K 2 2-48 



Na 2 1-66 



Ignition 1'95 



38-58 



11-05 



30-57 



•52 



10-32 



3-02 



4-16 



1-95 



99-61 100-17 



The presence of 1*95 per cent of water (ignition) in the- 

 analyses of such careful analysts as Smith and Bush indicates 

 that the mineral analyzed was am pinhole rather than pyroxene. 

 The analyses of Smith and Brush are more nearly complete 

 than those of Beck and Brewer, and taking this into consider- 

 ation, it is seen that the four analyses clearly confirm one 

 another. jSTo other work on the mineral hudsonite, to my 

 knowledge, has been done since that of Smith and Brush in 



* System of Mineralogy, 2d ed., 1844. 



f Third Ann. Report of the Eegents of the University of New York on. 

 the condition of the Cabinet of Natural History, p. 131, 1850. 

 % Liebig-Kopps's Jahresberichte, p. 712, 1850. 

 § This Journal, xvi, 369, 1853. 



