into account the “tails”, of 40 feet, whereas at the site of the falls there
is seen a height of magnetite of 20 feet.

Where the deposit disappears under the drift on the southeast
bank of the creek, it shows a width of nearly solid mineral (considering
the vertical tabular body only) of 58 feet. On the opposite side of the
creek, the corresponding width is 24 feet, so that in a total length along
the strike of 50 feet the magnetite pinches from 58 to 24 feet. This
change in width within short distances is one of the most striking charac-
teristics of contact metamorphic deposits.

There is nothing to prove or disprove the continuation of the deposit
in a northwesterly direction from the falls, but if the decrease in width
mentioned above were to continue the lode would disappear completely
in an additonal 35 feet of length. On the other hand, magnetite is believed
to have been found in the bottom of the old open-cut about 330 feet south-
east of the falls, or 250 feet distant from the most southeasterly exposure
in the creek bank. As the diorite-limestone contact trends in this direc-
tion, it is possible either that the same deposit continues for that distance,
or that another one along the same contact occurs in the open-cut. From
the nature of these deposits it is to be expected that each one should not
necessarily be very long, but that a number of them, perhaps lenticular
in shape, should be strung out intermittently along the contact. |

It is justifiable to conclude that the statements above made regarding |

172

There is a total vertical extent of magnetite exposed, without taking

surface extent will equally well apply to the extent and shape of the body |
or bodies in vertical cross-section.

Analyses

No attempt was made to sample the deposit during the course of the

present investigation. There were available a’ large number of analyses
of samples taken in various ways and by various engineers from the
Conqueror deposit, and these were considered sufficient for the purpose
of indicating the tenor of the ore with respect to deleterious impurities.
Analyses of large scale samples would alone give the much needed missing

information. :
The following selected analyses are typical of many that have been
published.
— A B Cc D E F G
Iron ifstovegeviysteies tect ereeerel 69-06 68-50 69-50 59-7 67-09 69-2 65-98
Dillane eee 1:40 SQ elleracereeeee 6-16 4-51 2-7 5-32
‘Shilphumereeeer in 0-30 0°35 0-30 3-08 1-60 0-5 0-445
Phosphorus...... ? 0-06 0-05 0-06 nil OeOte) ea todebens 0-012
RitaniomMans sean nil nil TH loans cere lapetnerea cll ome eevee: nil
A. Atkinson, J. B.: private report, 1904; composite of samples taken from sides, roof, floor, and
_ face of tunnel.
B. Ditto: composite of samples taken across magnetite lead in limestone.
C. Ditto oats of samples from different open-cuts on eastern bank of ereek, and 75 feet
above it,
D. Brewer, W. M.: Bibliography, No. 21; location of sample not specified.
oF Lindeman, E.: Bibliography, No. 16; sample taken along the tunnel.
F, Carmichael, H.: Bibliography, No. 6; location of sample not specified,
G. Yawkey, W. H.: private report, 1904.