Campbell and Howe — Meteoric Iron from Virginia. 471 



helium, and in this there was but a trace. In the case of the 

 present meteorite the presence of helium seems probable but 

 not certain. 



As regards the etched surfaces, they do not resemble those 

 of the '"Staunton." Mr. H. L. Preston has called our atten- 

 tion to the complete absence of the club-shaped " kamacite " 

 blades, so prominent in the " Staunton." These are also lack- 

 ing in one other mass of the " Staunton," and it was chiefly 

 from this consideration that Brezina held that one to be a dis- 

 tinct fall. 



Mr. Wirt Tassin of the United States National Museum has 

 had the kindness to compare the photographs of the etched 

 surfaces with the section of the " Staunton " iron described by 

 Mallet in 1871, and writes as follows : " It shows quite a dif- 

 ference in structure. The 'taenite' plates in the museum 

 specimen are smaller, averaging only half the size of those in 

 the photograph. The specimen also shows numerous line lines 

 of ' schreibersite,' often regularly arranged — especially in the 

 ' plessite,' and are occasionally so abundant as to give to it (the 

 ; plessite') a stippled appearance. These are lacking in the 

 photograph, although this may be due to differences in illumi- 

 nation. Finally, as you have already remarked, there is the 

 complete absence of the bulb- or club-like ' kamacite' blades." 



We propose to call this meteorite " Staunton, No. 7." The 

 original weight of the meteorite was somewhat more than 

 seven kilos ; its weight prior to the recent cutting was 7'15 

 kilos ; its present weight is 6'0-t kilos. 



Washington and Lee University, Lexington, Va. 



