I have serious doubts that any pictures of that ore will ever see the light of day. In fact, I would be willing to bet money on it. Nice try though.
Take care,
Joe
The Trail of Jacob Waltz’s Gold Ore
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Re: The Trail of Jacob Waltz’s Gold Ore
Roy,
I have serious doubts that any pictures of that ore will ever see the light of day. In fact, I would be willing to bet money on it. Nice try though.
Take care,
Joe
I have serious doubts that any pictures of that ore will ever see the light of day. In fact, I would be willing to bet money on it. Nice try though.
Take care,
Joe
Re: The Trail of Jacob Waltz’s Gold Ore
Wasp,
The title of the thread is “The Trail of Waltz’s Gold”.
The reason I was restricted to the Holmes involvement was because I thought that was the only game in town. You have shed light on an additional Trail of Waltz’s Gold which many of us were unaware. You have shared an original document which reflects an analysis of gold ore that I was under the impression might represent gold from under Waltz’s bed. What you have offered was exciting. (A new slant!)
You are not straying from the original topic and you can certainly understand the curiosity your story has generated. If you feel that you are unable to share any additional insight into this branch of the trail, “Thanks for the ride”! BUT, if you can continue your dialog with members, that would be great. You are not derailing the thread!
I have even thought I should be trying to start a new flow chart for this "new branch" of the trail but I do not have a sufficient understanding of the story to present anything meaningful.
Garry
The title of the thread is “The Trail of Waltz’s Gold”.
The reason I was restricted to the Holmes involvement was because I thought that was the only game in town. You have shed light on an additional Trail of Waltz’s Gold which many of us were unaware. You have shared an original document which reflects an analysis of gold ore that I was under the impression might represent gold from under Waltz’s bed. What you have offered was exciting. (A new slant!)
You are not straying from the original topic and you can certainly understand the curiosity your story has generated. If you feel that you are unable to share any additional insight into this branch of the trail, “Thanks for the ride”! BUT, if you can continue your dialog with members, that would be great. You are not derailing the thread!
I have even thought I should be trying to start a new flow chart for this "new branch" of the trail but I do not have a sufficient understanding of the story to present anything meaningful.
Garry
The Wasp Report
It appears we are being left to our own devises regarding the “analysis report”. That is always dangerous thing!
I will offer a couple of things that we know for sure and from there on it will probably go downhill.
The report header that is taped over refers to Crismon and Nichols Assayers and Chemists.
They appear at the Salt Lake City address in Bureau of Mines Information Circular 8714r (1977)
Crismon and Nichols
440 South 500 West
Salt lake City, Utah 84101
The Salt Lake City Directories provide us a window for the time period that Crismon and Nichols were conducting business from this address. In the 1972 the company was listed at 229 South West Temple Street. They had been at this location since 1905. About the middle of 1972 the Salt Lake Redevelopment Agency was relocating the business out of the downtown area to an industrial area. In August the move was complete and Paul Crismon placed an ad in the classified section in which he gave his new address as 440 South West 4th Ave. This is the same location as the later 440 South 500 West.
1975 is first city directory that I have access to that lists the address as 440 South 500 West. I don’t have the 1973 and 1974 directories so the address was likely formalized in that time period. Crimson and Nichols continued to appear in the 1976 and 1977 directories.
The business was gone by 1978. Acme Radiator appears at the 440 address in 1978 and 1979 and the only assay company still listed in the 1978 Salt Lake directory was the Union Assay Office.
By the 1970s Crismon and Nichols was a two man operation consisting of Paul Crismon and a helper, Walter Powers. In April of 1978, Paul Crismon who listed himself as president of the company died.
What can we take from the above?
The preprinted assay form we see in Wasp’s document was created and in use by Crismon and Nichols in the 1972 to 1977 timeframe.
I had initially assumed that the document reflected the analysis of the 7# ore sample. I thought it strange that the date on the report was taped over yet Wasp told us the test on the sample was done over 40 years ago. (The late 1960s) Why not leave that exposed.
I finally concluded that if the over 40 years ago reference was correct, we are looking at two separate events.
1. An assay or chemical analysis test done in the late 1960s
2. A geological analysis report prepared sometime “after” 1972.
At this point in time I would have reservations about stating emphatically that Crismon and Nichols actually prepared the geological analysis in the 1973-1977 timeframe.
Garry
I will offer a couple of things that we know for sure and from there on it will probably go downhill.
The report header that is taped over refers to Crismon and Nichols Assayers and Chemists.
They appear at the Salt Lake City address in Bureau of Mines Information Circular 8714r (1977)
Crismon and Nichols
440 South 500 West
Salt lake City, Utah 84101
The Salt Lake City Directories provide us a window for the time period that Crismon and Nichols were conducting business from this address. In the 1972 the company was listed at 229 South West Temple Street. They had been at this location since 1905. About the middle of 1972 the Salt Lake Redevelopment Agency was relocating the business out of the downtown area to an industrial area. In August the move was complete and Paul Crismon placed an ad in the classified section in which he gave his new address as 440 South West 4th Ave. This is the same location as the later 440 South 500 West.
1975 is first city directory that I have access to that lists the address as 440 South 500 West. I don’t have the 1973 and 1974 directories so the address was likely formalized in that time period. Crimson and Nichols continued to appear in the 1976 and 1977 directories.
The business was gone by 1978. Acme Radiator appears at the 440 address in 1978 and 1979 and the only assay company still listed in the 1978 Salt Lake directory was the Union Assay Office.
By the 1970s Crismon and Nichols was a two man operation consisting of Paul Crismon and a helper, Walter Powers. In April of 1978, Paul Crismon who listed himself as president of the company died.
What can we take from the above?
The preprinted assay form we see in Wasp’s document was created and in use by Crismon and Nichols in the 1972 to 1977 timeframe.
I had initially assumed that the document reflected the analysis of the 7# ore sample. I thought it strange that the date on the report was taped over yet Wasp told us the test on the sample was done over 40 years ago. (The late 1960s) Why not leave that exposed.
I finally concluded that if the over 40 years ago reference was correct, we are looking at two separate events.
1. An assay or chemical analysis test done in the late 1960s
2. A geological analysis report prepared sometime “after” 1972.
At this point in time I would have reservations about stating emphatically that Crismon and Nichols actually prepared the geological analysis in the 1973-1977 timeframe.
Garry
Re: The Trail of Jacob Waltz’s Gold Ore
Hello All:
In addition to sharing what he found on the purported author(s) of Wasp’s report, Garry has pointed out one of the dilemmas we face regarding it, and I too feel we are being left to ponder whether there is more to the story behind it. But as Garry also indicated, we appear to be on our own in trying to figure out what it means and how it relates to the thread. That invariably leads to assumptions that may or may not be correct, but the only way that I see to get further down the road is lay out what we know and go from there.
Within a couple of days of the report being posted, a few of us had already kicked around the technical content of the report, soon after discovering that the report was not an assay report of anything, even though it does appear on assayer letterhead and was in fact titled “Dutchman Ore Assay Report”.
In actuality, page 1 of the Wasp report is an adapted version of the generic Epithermal Quartz Alunite Gold (Ep-Q Alunite Au) mineral deposit model first published by the USGS in 1986. The model can be accessed online in USGS Bulletin 1693 at the following link:
http://pubs.usgs.gov/bul/b1693/Md25e.pdf
(Note: An earlier version of this model was authored by geologist Byron R Berger of the USGS in December 1982 based on the work of RH Ashley, but that version of Berger’s model did not contain the exact phraseology contained in the Wasp report, whereas his later 1986 version of the model does).
In part of an e-mail I sent to Garry and a couple of others, I added my thoughts on what page 1 of the Wasp report represented:
“The USGS model is a generic description of an Ep-Q Alunite Au deposit. It is not meant to be a precise description of any particular ore sample, but of the type of mineralization, alteration, host geology, and so forth that one could reasonably expect to find that type of deposit in. It is just that, a model, and it encompasses the attributes that may or may not be present in the deposit (indicated by the +/- signs next to each mineral or element), based on the example deposits used to construct the model (in this case, Goldfield Nevada, Kasuga Mine Japan, El Indio Mine Chile, and so forth).”
From Berger’s 1986 USGS model, we know that the area blocked out by Wasp in the main body of the report states:
“....sphalerite, +/- hubernite. May have hypogene oxidation phase with chalcocite....”
Digging a little deeper into the science behind the USGS report, there appears to be little reason to block out the above information, since it is simply a variable that may or may not be present in this type of deposit. It is of little value in determining the type of deposit, since it is a variable characteristic, and has nothing to do with recognizing an area or geological feature that would lead one to a specific area. It also appears to have nothing to do with Wasp’s stated reasons for blocking out parts of the report (protecting somebody’s identity).
Another point about the report has already been brought up by Jesse Feldman, namely the naming of the Tortilla caldera, and where that information came from. No test in the world, assay or otherwise, would have pinpointed that (or any other) location, leaving us to wonder how and why a specific location was addressed in an otherwise general deposit model description?
And a final technical comment for now, the USGS Ep-Q Alunite Au mineral deposit model specifically states that these types of deposits are always located in vuggy veins, a characteristic that Joe Poterie made clear was not associated with Waltz’s gold. Yet, those words were deleted from the Wasp report and replaced with “quartz veins”, leading to some further speculation on my part about what this report really represents.
So, what does all this mean?
Basically, we have a window of 1972 to 1978 for Crismon and Nichols Assayers and Chemists at the address indicated on the form, and we have technical content in the report that was not published by the USGS until 1986.
For me, the credibility of the report is in question, as are the stated reasons for its posting.
Larry
In addition to sharing what he found on the purported author(s) of Wasp’s report, Garry has pointed out one of the dilemmas we face regarding it, and I too feel we are being left to ponder whether there is more to the story behind it. But as Garry also indicated, we appear to be on our own in trying to figure out what it means and how it relates to the thread. That invariably leads to assumptions that may or may not be correct, but the only way that I see to get further down the road is lay out what we know and go from there.
Within a couple of days of the report being posted, a few of us had already kicked around the technical content of the report, soon after discovering that the report was not an assay report of anything, even though it does appear on assayer letterhead and was in fact titled “Dutchman Ore Assay Report”.
In actuality, page 1 of the Wasp report is an adapted version of the generic Epithermal Quartz Alunite Gold (Ep-Q Alunite Au) mineral deposit model first published by the USGS in 1986. The model can be accessed online in USGS Bulletin 1693 at the following link:
http://pubs.usgs.gov/bul/b1693/Md25e.pdf
(Note: An earlier version of this model was authored by geologist Byron R Berger of the USGS in December 1982 based on the work of RH Ashley, but that version of Berger’s model did not contain the exact phraseology contained in the Wasp report, whereas his later 1986 version of the model does).
In part of an e-mail I sent to Garry and a couple of others, I added my thoughts on what page 1 of the Wasp report represented:
“The USGS model is a generic description of an Ep-Q Alunite Au deposit. It is not meant to be a precise description of any particular ore sample, but of the type of mineralization, alteration, host geology, and so forth that one could reasonably expect to find that type of deposit in. It is just that, a model, and it encompasses the attributes that may or may not be present in the deposit (indicated by the +/- signs next to each mineral or element), based on the example deposits used to construct the model (in this case, Goldfield Nevada, Kasuga Mine Japan, El Indio Mine Chile, and so forth).”
From Berger’s 1986 USGS model, we know that the area blocked out by Wasp in the main body of the report states:
“....sphalerite, +/- hubernite. May have hypogene oxidation phase with chalcocite....”
Digging a little deeper into the science behind the USGS report, there appears to be little reason to block out the above information, since it is simply a variable that may or may not be present in this type of deposit. It is of little value in determining the type of deposit, since it is a variable characteristic, and has nothing to do with recognizing an area or geological feature that would lead one to a specific area. It also appears to have nothing to do with Wasp’s stated reasons for blocking out parts of the report (protecting somebody’s identity).
Another point about the report has already been brought up by Jesse Feldman, namely the naming of the Tortilla caldera, and where that information came from. No test in the world, assay or otherwise, would have pinpointed that (or any other) location, leaving us to wonder how and why a specific location was addressed in an otherwise general deposit model description?
And a final technical comment for now, the USGS Ep-Q Alunite Au mineral deposit model specifically states that these types of deposits are always located in vuggy veins, a characteristic that Joe Poterie made clear was not associated with Waltz’s gold. Yet, those words were deleted from the Wasp report and replaced with “quartz veins”, leading to some further speculation on my part about what this report really represents.
So, what does all this mean?
Basically, we have a window of 1972 to 1978 for Crismon and Nichols Assayers and Chemists at the address indicated on the form, and we have technical content in the report that was not published by the USGS until 1986.
For me, the credibility of the report is in question, as are the stated reasons for its posting.
Larry
Re: The Trail of Jacob Waltz’s Gold Ore
Larry and all. I believe Wasp posted at least twice why he shared the report, and what the reports involvement with the thread is. Re-read his posts if you missed it.Ozarker wrote:we appear to be on our own in trying to figure out what it means and how it relates to the thread.
Larry
Randy Wright
Hobbiest LDM seeker
Mesa, AZ
"I don't care if it has electric windows. I don't care if the door gaps are straight, but when the driver steps on the gas I want him to piss his pants."
Enzo Ferrari
Hobbiest LDM seeker
Mesa, AZ
"I don't care if it has electric windows. I don't care if the door gaps are straight, but when the driver steps on the gas I want him to piss his pants."
Enzo Ferrari
Re: The Trail of Jacob Waltz’s Gold Ore
Thought I would offer a few comments on Wasp's ore analysis report and the recent comments by Larry and Garry.
1. The USGS has a number of published "models" on different types of ore deposits from across the U.S. Each of these models has a Model Number associated with it. These models were developed by the USGS when there were multiple analysis done on different ore deposits over a period of years that had a high commonality or a very large ore body which was of interest. These models were thus formulated off earlier analysis done on actual ore deposits - ie, these models were just a codification of what had already been found. This is what leads to a lot of the +/- symbols in the models and the multiple listings of minerals/metals/etc that can be found with a particular model. Each actual ore analysis looked at for the model development probably did not match the model exactly. There appears to be a large number of these models from what little surffing I did on the USGS site. Fore instance, here are three other models on epithermal gold deposits:
Model 25b
pubs.usgs.gov/bul/b1693/html/bull7a0j.htm
Model 25d
http://pubs.usgs.gov/bul/b1693/html/bull7khf.htm
Model 25c
pubs.usgs.gov/bul/b1693/html/bull5nqr.htm
Note that the USGS reference Garry included is for Model 25e and at the bottom of that reference it references a mine and ore analysis done in 1909!
I would conclude from this that the ore report posted by Wasp was more likely "plagiarized" by the USGS - and not the other way around.
2. Larry made the follow comment:
"And a final technical comment for now, the USGS Ep-Q Alunite Au mineral deposit model specifically states that these types of deposits are always located in vuggy veins, a characteristic that Joe Poterie made clear was not associated with Waltz’s gold. Yet, those words were deleted from the Wasp report and replaced with “quartz veins”, leading to some further speculation on my part about what this report really represents."
The actual wording out of Model 25e is:
"Texture/Structure Veins, breccia pipes, pods, dikes; replacement veins often porous, and vuggy,
with comb structure, and crustified banding."
Note that there is a semicolon after the word dikes. The second part of this sentence does not apply to the first - the first part describes structured quartz veins l. The second part speaks to replacement veins that are vuggy. Key difference between two different types of deposits.
3. One is making a very thin guess to predict what the wording is under the taped out area in the Mineralogy section - it may well be something different! Especially based on Item 2 above.
4. I suspect Wasp only posted Page 1 of the report for a reason. The info on this page is very typical of a epithermal quartz alunite gold deposit but with one key element that might expose more than desired. Not much "secret" info is exposed here, but one can see the parallel to Dutchman ore in it.
5. The report says the ore comes from the fracture zones of the Tortilla Caldera. This info would have been provided by the individual requesting the analysis - the Salt Lake company certainly would not know it origins. If this ore is not from Waltz's "under the bed ore", but is a close match to Dutchman ore and was part of Thomas Glover's ore analysis, then there are only two choices from the lists on Page 281 and 282 in Glover's book:
A. Camp Ore
B. Kochera Ore
If one is knowledgeable of the locations associated with these two sets of ore, the Tortilla Caldera is not a bad guess as to what formed them.
Not too sure what to make of Garry's date question of when the assayer had the office on West St. Valid question. However, I don't know if some of the other conclusions will hold up under scrutiny. I suggest the approach that Thomas Glover used in his research - the test of wrongness. Questions can be brought up about the analysis Wasp posted, but nothing so far establishes a proof of wrongness.
My opinion only of course and I an not a geology expert for sure!
Roger
1. The USGS has a number of published "models" on different types of ore deposits from across the U.S. Each of these models has a Model Number associated with it. These models were developed by the USGS when there were multiple analysis done on different ore deposits over a period of years that had a high commonality or a very large ore body which was of interest. These models were thus formulated off earlier analysis done on actual ore deposits - ie, these models were just a codification of what had already been found. This is what leads to a lot of the +/- symbols in the models and the multiple listings of minerals/metals/etc that can be found with a particular model. Each actual ore analysis looked at for the model development probably did not match the model exactly. There appears to be a large number of these models from what little surffing I did on the USGS site. Fore instance, here are three other models on epithermal gold deposits:
Model 25b
pubs.usgs.gov/bul/b1693/html/bull7a0j.htm
Model 25d
http://pubs.usgs.gov/bul/b1693/html/bull7khf.htm
Model 25c
pubs.usgs.gov/bul/b1693/html/bull5nqr.htm
Note that the USGS reference Garry included is for Model 25e and at the bottom of that reference it references a mine and ore analysis done in 1909!
I would conclude from this that the ore report posted by Wasp was more likely "plagiarized" by the USGS - and not the other way around.
2. Larry made the follow comment:
"And a final technical comment for now, the USGS Ep-Q Alunite Au mineral deposit model specifically states that these types of deposits are always located in vuggy veins, a characteristic that Joe Poterie made clear was not associated with Waltz’s gold. Yet, those words were deleted from the Wasp report and replaced with “quartz veins”, leading to some further speculation on my part about what this report really represents."
The actual wording out of Model 25e is:
"Texture/Structure Veins, breccia pipes, pods, dikes; replacement veins often porous, and vuggy,
with comb structure, and crustified banding."
Note that there is a semicolon after the word dikes. The second part of this sentence does not apply to the first - the first part describes structured quartz veins l. The second part speaks to replacement veins that are vuggy. Key difference between two different types of deposits.
3. One is making a very thin guess to predict what the wording is under the taped out area in the Mineralogy section - it may well be something different! Especially based on Item 2 above.
4. I suspect Wasp only posted Page 1 of the report for a reason. The info on this page is very typical of a epithermal quartz alunite gold deposit but with one key element that might expose more than desired. Not much "secret" info is exposed here, but one can see the parallel to Dutchman ore in it.
5. The report says the ore comes from the fracture zones of the Tortilla Caldera. This info would have been provided by the individual requesting the analysis - the Salt Lake company certainly would not know it origins. If this ore is not from Waltz's "under the bed ore", but is a close match to Dutchman ore and was part of Thomas Glover's ore analysis, then there are only two choices from the lists on Page 281 and 282 in Glover's book:
A. Camp Ore
B. Kochera Ore
If one is knowledgeable of the locations associated with these two sets of ore, the Tortilla Caldera is not a bad guess as to what formed them.
Not too sure what to make of Garry's date question of when the assayer had the office on West St. Valid question. However, I don't know if some of the other conclusions will hold up under scrutiny. I suggest the approach that Thomas Glover used in his research - the test of wrongness. Questions can be brought up about the analysis Wasp posted, but nothing so far establishes a proof of wrongness.
My opinion only of course and I an not a geology expert for sure!
Roger
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Re: The Trail of Jacob Waltz’s Gold Ore
Guys,
With what you had to go on.......Nice posts.
Roger,
I will put my money on Kochera Ore. Believe I may have suggested that.....elsewhere.
Take care,
Joe
With what you had to go on.......Nice posts.
Roger,
I will put my money on Kochera Ore. Believe I may have suggested that.....elsewhere.
Take care,
Joe
Crismon and Nichols Co.
Setting aside the mineral models for a moment, I wanted to include some background on Crismon and Nichols Assayers and Chemists. An article appeared in the Salt Lake Desert News in 1972 that paints a picture of the company, their history, activities and prospects.
My reservation in my previous post regarding whether Crismon and Nichols Co. prepared the geological analysis springs partially from this article. Paul conducted basic wet and dry assays and the geological information carried in the body of Wasp’s report seems out of scope for something Paul Crismon would be preparing. Paul’s helper, Walter Powers was driving a truck for a “Fur Breeder” by 1979 so he was almost surely not an individual with the geology background.
Who did prepare the body of the report? I would hope that the signature that has been blacked out would be something that is not critical and Wasp will be able to share that information.
Garry
Paul Crismon was running an old fashion assay shop in which they did basic assays and the business was in decline. (My initial image was one of a spotless laboratory with the latest technologies and technicians buzzing about.) [Kind of like where Cubfan works?]Salt Lake City Desert News, Saturday May 13, 1972
Assaying: A Proud Profession Is Fading
By ARNOLD IRVINE
Associate Business Editor
Measuring a small quantity of brownish powder into a finely balanced chemist’s scale, Paul Crismon seems pretty calm about the imminent uprooting of his assay office.
He dumps the powder into a flask, adds liquid and sets the flask boiling over a Bunsen burner. The acrid fumes disappear up the chemical-encrusted chimney.
“I do the wet assaying. My helper does the fire assaying.” He explained as he wrote some markings on a beaker.
There used to be six assay offices on West Temple. Now Crismon and Nichols is the only one left. The Salt Lake Redevelopment Agency is going to move us out soon,” he drawled as he worked in the jungle of flasks, beakers, glass tubing and other chemist’s paraphernalia that crowd the laboratory. It’s hardly the spotless work area of the research scientist. The counters and walls are encrusted and stained with the remains of thousands of tests.
The agency is acquiring the assay office along with other property in the area near the Salt Palace. The old buildings will be demolished and the land sold to developers who will put it to new uses in keeping with the new West Temple image.
“It’s costing the Redevelopment Agency $27,000 to move us. They have to do it at no expense to us. The furnaces will all have to be rebuilt.” Crismon said, looking at a battery of firebrick furnaces especially constructed for the assay tests. “They cost a lot of money.”
The new location is 440 S. 4th West. Now known as Crismon and Nichols Assayers and Chemists, the firm started as Crismon Brothers in 1900. It has been at its present location, 229 S. West Temple for 67 years.
The building that houses the laboratory was built in 1905 by Crismon’s grandmother who owned the property. Crismon’s father and uncle were the founders of the assay business.
“There’s only one other old-time company assay company left in town,” Crismon said. “The Union Assay Office Inc. had to move from West Temple when the Salt Palace was built. They’re at 269 Brooklyn Ave.”
“We just do straight chemical and fire assaying. We have to use these processes because the smelters and shippers use them,” Crismon explained.
He noted that there are new assay companies in the area that employ the more recently developed spectrographic and instrumental processes.
The old assay offices have been diminishing for several years because “the small miner has been disappearing.” Crismon explained.
“In the depression days, the state had dozens of small miners. Now they’re all gone and the big companies that are left have their own laboratories,” he said.
Another cause of the decline is assaying has been the closure of the smelters at Murray, Midvale and Tooele. When Kennecott Copper Corp. took over the Garfield Smelter, the custom work was eliminated there.
Custom mill closures in Midvale, Tooele and Stockton also have cut down the assay business.
Custom smelting and milling creates umpire business for the assayers because of the disputes between the ore shippers and the processors over the content of the ore. Whenever such a disagreement arises, samples are sent to the independent assayer for tests.
“At one time or another, we’ve done umpire work from all over the world – places as far away as Saudi Arabia and Alaska,” Crismon said.
A salesman from a supply house dropped by and Crismon began looking through his chemical-laden cupboards.
“I’ll need some potassium bisulfate,“ he said.
“Business is as bad now as it was during the depression. We’re making more money but with rising costs, we’re no better off,” he mused.
Last year, he grossed about $35,000 which wasn’t as well as he had done in the year before that. This year, with more mills and smelters closed, he expects income to drop further.
Has he, because of his position as an assayer, been able to get in on the ground floor of some rich bonanzas?
We never know if an ore sample is a good deal or not. A lot of people fool themselves. They bring in the best sample they can find for assay but when they go to mine the ore body, it doesn’t have the value the assay showed,” Crismon said.
Prospectors and miners are traditionally close-mouthed about their finds and aren’t likely to tell the assayer all about them.
Come to think of it, maybe assayers are close-mouthed, too, about what they’ve acquired.
At any rate Crisomn at 64, plans to keep on assaying. “I can’t afford to retire.”
He used to put in some long hours, particularly during the prospecting booms.
“During the tungsten boom, I started working one day at 8 a.m., worked through the day, all night, through the next day and until midnight the next night,” he recalled.
“I don’t do that sort of thing anymore although I do sometimes stay here until none at night or even later. I generally start work at eight a.m. and quit at six p.m.,” he said.
As a young man, he had hoped to become a lawyer. The depression cut his law training short and he became a purser on cruise ships sailing from the East Coast.
When his father’s partner, Frank Nichols, was forced to retire from the assay business due to illness, Crismon returned to Salt Lake City, to become an assayer.
Incidentally, if you have found the “mother lode” or some such valuable vein and are wondering about the cost of an assay, the prices range from $2 for zinc copper to as much as $8 for coal and uranium.
My reservation in my previous post regarding whether Crismon and Nichols Co. prepared the geological analysis springs partially from this article. Paul conducted basic wet and dry assays and the geological information carried in the body of Wasp’s report seems out of scope for something Paul Crismon would be preparing. Paul’s helper, Walter Powers was driving a truck for a “Fur Breeder” by 1979 so he was almost surely not an individual with the geology background.
Who did prepare the body of the report? I would hope that the signature that has been blacked out would be something that is not critical and Wasp will be able to share that information.
Garry
Re: The Trail of Jacob Waltz’s Gold Ore
Here's a web link to a scanned copy of the newspaper article that Garry provided the wording from. It has a couple of photo's that you might find interesting including one of Paul Crismon who was 64 at the time.
http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=3 ... 47,3426511
Also, here is a link to a set of photo's of Crismon & Nichols old assay office on West Temple Street - inside and out that are interesting.
http://content.lib.utah.edu/cdm4/result ... 1=Chemists
One other thought on the assay report posted by Wasp. Wonder if the standard assay format was to list the type of deposit being analyzed - Epithermal Quartz Alunite Gold / Au-Ag-TE in this case - and to then list the common definition for that type of deposit. Much like a reference statement. Then the rest of the report would contain the actual analysis performed on the sample in question. I have not seen these type ore reports so have no clue as to how they were normally formatted or their contents. Anyone have some reference examples on this?
These are just some thoughts I've had on the subject. Again, I'm certainly no expert in this field!!
Roger
http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=3 ... 47,3426511
Also, here is a link to a set of photo's of Crismon & Nichols old assay office on West Temple Street - inside and out that are interesting.
http://content.lib.utah.edu/cdm4/result ... 1=Chemists
One other thought on the assay report posted by Wasp. Wonder if the standard assay format was to list the type of deposit being analyzed - Epithermal Quartz Alunite Gold / Au-Ag-TE in this case - and to then list the common definition for that type of deposit. Much like a reference statement. Then the rest of the report would contain the actual analysis performed on the sample in question. I have not seen these type ore reports so have no clue as to how they were normally formatted or their contents. Anyone have some reference examples on this?
These are just some thoughts I've had on the subject. Again, I'm certainly no expert in this field!!
Roger
Re: The Trail of Jacob Waltz’s Gold Ore
Roger,
You wrote "assay report posted by Wasp"
I think we may all be getting confused with some of the nomenclature. We all tend to use the words assay, chemical analysis and analysis interchangeably. I believe Wasp has pointed out they are three separate things.
Assay might be used to determine the quantity of precious metal in an ore sample. (Something Crimson would do)
Chemical Analysis might be used to determine the composition of an ore sample. Percentages of various minerals and elements present in the sample. (Something Cubfan would do) (Percentages may be a bad term)
The Analysis Report in our case, is defined by Wasp as being a comparison of two different ores, and their ore deposits. The report does NOT represent an Assay Report or a Chemical Analysis report.
(I hope I haven’t screwed this up too badly)
At one time I believed a wet assay would yield a chemical analysis (composition of an ore) I no longer believe this is the case.
However, I’m learning along with everyone else and welcome any corrections or comments.
Garry
You wrote "assay report posted by Wasp"
I think we may all be getting confused with some of the nomenclature. We all tend to use the words assay, chemical analysis and analysis interchangeably. I believe Wasp has pointed out they are three separate things.
Assay might be used to determine the quantity of precious metal in an ore sample. (Something Crimson would do)
Chemical Analysis might be used to determine the composition of an ore sample. Percentages of various minerals and elements present in the sample. (Something Cubfan would do) (Percentages may be a bad term)
The Analysis Report in our case, is defined by Wasp as being a comparison of two different ores, and their ore deposits. The report does NOT represent an Assay Report or a Chemical Analysis report.
(I hope I haven’t screwed this up too badly)
At one time I believed a wet assay would yield a chemical analysis (composition of an ore) I no longer believe this is the case.
However, I’m learning along with everyone else and welcome any corrections or comments.
Garry
Re: The Trail of Jacob Waltz’s Gold Ore
I have tried to focus on three of the items taped over in the report. Namely the identity of the assay company, the date the document was prepared and the individual who prepared the document. We have little information on the latter two items and that leads to almost limitless possibilities.
I have not offered anything conflicting with the information that Wasp shared. In fact, things seem to track pretty well. There was an assay report on the 7 pounds of ore in the late 1960s followed by an analysis that compared this ore with another ore sample. The analysis document was prepared sometime after 1972. We do not know who prepared or who signed the document.
My initial assumption was that Paul Crismon prepared and signed the analysis. It seemed to me that if the report was under his business header he must be the guy. As I came to realize what type of information was contained in the body of the report, I began to question that assumption. He was a chemist had been around the assay business most of his life and his chemistry training was thru the school of hard knocks. Although I’m sure Paul had some grasp of geology it wasn’t his specialty. He just seems ill suited to prepare a meaningful report of this type.
A few possibilities that come to mind are listed below. (there are many)
1. Paul Crismon could have signed the report acting primarily as a surrogate. (The mineral model data was gathered by someone else, the assay report and sample ore specimens were presented and the report was generated.) (1972-1977)
2. Blank copies of the Crismon & Nichols business forms were retained by a previous customer and these were used to prepare the report at a much later date. (1986 or after)
3. A take off of No. 2 above. We know there are some slight variations in the report that differ from final released model in 1986. Could the preparer have been working from a draft and this report was being generated in response to the Forest Service closing the Superstitions to mining. (1884-1985)
Are these stretches? Maybe, but Paul Crismon generating a geological analysis is a stretch for me.
Garry
I have not offered anything conflicting with the information that Wasp shared. In fact, things seem to track pretty well. There was an assay report on the 7 pounds of ore in the late 1960s followed by an analysis that compared this ore with another ore sample. The analysis document was prepared sometime after 1972. We do not know who prepared or who signed the document.
My initial assumption was that Paul Crismon prepared and signed the analysis. It seemed to me that if the report was under his business header he must be the guy. As I came to realize what type of information was contained in the body of the report, I began to question that assumption. He was a chemist had been around the assay business most of his life and his chemistry training was thru the school of hard knocks. Although I’m sure Paul had some grasp of geology it wasn’t his specialty. He just seems ill suited to prepare a meaningful report of this type.
A few possibilities that come to mind are listed below. (there are many)
1. Paul Crismon could have signed the report acting primarily as a surrogate. (The mineral model data was gathered by someone else, the assay report and sample ore specimens were presented and the report was generated.) (1972-1977)
2. Blank copies of the Crismon & Nichols business forms were retained by a previous customer and these were used to prepare the report at a much later date. (1986 or after)
3. A take off of No. 2 above. We know there are some slight variations in the report that differ from final released model in 1986. Could the preparer have been working from a draft and this report was being generated in response to the Forest Service closing the Superstitions to mining. (1884-1985)
Are these stretches? Maybe, but Paul Crismon generating a geological analysis is a stretch for me.
Garry
Re: The Trail of Jacob Waltz’s Gold Ore
Hello Roger:
It looks like you’ve had a chance to review some of the USGS models and you had some comments that I’d like to address:
The 1909 reference in Model 25e is the work of USGS geologist FL Ransome. This was a detailed 258-page study of the ore deposits in and around Goldfield, Nevada, including but not limited to alunite gold deposits. Ransome’s work was certainly used as a reference for the 1983 and 1986 versions of the Ep-Q alunite Au model, just like the work of Walthier and others were consulted for the deposit at El Indio Mine in Chile. These earlier professional papers had to be reduced into the form we see in today’s models, which appears to have been no small task!
I highly doubt that the USGS model plagiarized the work of Crismon and Nichols. By reviewing the Ep-Q Alunite Au model as it appeared in Erickson (1982), Cox (1983), and Cox and Singer (1986), it is plainly evident that the model originated and evolved within the USGS scientific community based solely on the references cited in those publications.
I think we are talking about two different items here.
The first line item in the 1986 USGS Model 25e is the alternative name for the type of deposit (i.e., acid sulfate, or enargite gold, a term coined by RH Ashley in 1982).
The second line item of the USGS model specifically states the overall description of this type of deposit as follows:
“Gold, pyrite, and enargite in vuggy veins and breccias in zones of high-alumina alteration related to felsic volcanism.”
In the Wasp report, the word “vuggy” in the above statement was deleted and replaced with simply “quartz”, which to me seems to be a pretty selective edit. I have my own hunch on why that was done, and will leave it to others to form their own conclusions.
First, see my response to number 2 above.
Regarding the blacked out words in the mineralogy section of the Wasp report:
Hypogene oxidation phase is the process whereby mineral enrichment occurs in some Ep-Q Alunite Au deposits. This was not a “thin guess” on my part, but is based on the science behind the model. A short basic description of the enrichment process can be found at the following link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supergene_(geology)
Putting the science aside for the moment, the first word blacked out in the mineralogy section of Wasp’s report begins with an “hu” (possibly “hue”), and the corresponding word in the USGS model just happens to be “huebnerite”.
Similarly, the first words that appear after the blackout in Wasp’s report are “oxidation phase”. These words also appear in the USGS model, preceded by the words “May have hypogene”.
And finally I will add this. If by chance there are different words or phrases blacked out in the Wasp report, then it is no longer an Ep-Q Alunite Au model, and whoever created the document should have had their work checked, or they should have selected a different model to copy.
Here’s a link to USGS Bulletin 1693 Model 22b (Au-Ag-Te Veins):
http://pubs.usgs.gov/bul/b1693/Md22b.pdf
All:
I stated in a previous post that Byron R Berger, the author of the 1986 USGS mineral deposit model used as a basis for the Wasp report, referenced the work of RH Ashley, when I should have said RP Ashley. Ashley’s original paper, written in 1982, can be accessed at the following link:
http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/1982/ofr-82-0795/PG144-147.pdf
Larry
It looks like you’ve had a chance to review some of the USGS models and you had some comments that I’d like to address:
1. The USGS has a number of published "models" on different types of ore deposits from across the U.S. Each of these models has a Model Number associated with it. These models were developed by the USGS when there were multiple analysis done on different ore deposits over a period of years that had a high commonality or a very large ore body which was of interest. These models were thus formulated off earlier analysis done on actual ore deposits - ie, these models were just a codification of what had already been found. This is what leads to a lot of the +/- symbols in the models and the multiple listings of minerals/metals/etc that can be found with a particular model. Each actual ore analysis looked at for the model development probably did not match the model exactly. There appears to be a large number of these models from what little surffing I did on the USGS site. Fore instance, here are three other models on epithermal gold deposits:
Model 25b
pubs.usgs.gov/bul/b1693/html/bull7a0j.htm
Model 25d
http://pubs.usgs.gov/bul/b1693/html/bull7khf.htm
Model 25c
pubs.usgs.gov/bul/b1693/html/bull5nqr.htm
Note that the USGS reference Garry included is for Model 25e and at the bottom of that reference it references a mine and ore analysis done in 1909!
I would conclude from this that the ore report posted by Wasp was more likely "plagiarized" by the USGS - and not the other way around.
The 1909 reference in Model 25e is the work of USGS geologist FL Ransome. This was a detailed 258-page study of the ore deposits in and around Goldfield, Nevada, including but not limited to alunite gold deposits. Ransome’s work was certainly used as a reference for the 1983 and 1986 versions of the Ep-Q alunite Au model, just like the work of Walthier and others were consulted for the deposit at El Indio Mine in Chile. These earlier professional papers had to be reduced into the form we see in today’s models, which appears to have been no small task!
I highly doubt that the USGS model plagiarized the work of Crismon and Nichols. By reviewing the Ep-Q Alunite Au model as it appeared in Erickson (1982), Cox (1983), and Cox and Singer (1986), it is plainly evident that the model originated and evolved within the USGS scientific community based solely on the references cited in those publications.
2. Larry made the follow comment:
"And a final technical comment for now, the USGS Ep-Q Alunite Au mineral deposit model specifically states that these types of deposits are always located in vuggy veins, a characteristic that Joe Poterie made clear was not associated with Waltz’s gold. Yet, those words were deleted from the Wasp report and replaced with “quartz veins”, leading to some further speculation on my part about what this report really represents."
The actual wording out of Model 25e is:
"Texture/Structure Veins, breccia pipes, pods, dikes; replacement veins often porous, and vuggy,
with comb structure, and crustified banding."
Note that there is a semicolon after the word dikes. The second part of this sentence does not apply to the first - the first part describes structured quartz veins l. The second part speaks to replacement veins that are vuggy. Key difference between two different types of deposits.
I think we are talking about two different items here.
The first line item in the 1986 USGS Model 25e is the alternative name for the type of deposit (i.e., acid sulfate, or enargite gold, a term coined by RH Ashley in 1982).
The second line item of the USGS model specifically states the overall description of this type of deposit as follows:
“Gold, pyrite, and enargite in vuggy veins and breccias in zones of high-alumina alteration related to felsic volcanism.”
In the Wasp report, the word “vuggy” in the above statement was deleted and replaced with simply “quartz”, which to me seems to be a pretty selective edit. I have my own hunch on why that was done, and will leave it to others to form their own conclusions.
3. One is making a very thin guess to predict what the wording is under the taped out area in the Mineralogy section - it may well be something different! Especially based on Item 2 above.
First, see my response to number 2 above.
Regarding the blacked out words in the mineralogy section of the Wasp report:
Hypogene oxidation phase is the process whereby mineral enrichment occurs in some Ep-Q Alunite Au deposits. This was not a “thin guess” on my part, but is based on the science behind the model. A short basic description of the enrichment process can be found at the following link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supergene_(geology)
Putting the science aside for the moment, the first word blacked out in the mineralogy section of Wasp’s report begins with an “hu” (possibly “hue”), and the corresponding word in the USGS model just happens to be “huebnerite”.
Similarly, the first words that appear after the blackout in Wasp’s report are “oxidation phase”. These words also appear in the USGS model, preceded by the words “May have hypogene”.
And finally I will add this. If by chance there are different words or phrases blacked out in the Wasp report, then it is no longer an Ep-Q Alunite Au model, and whoever created the document should have had their work checked, or they should have selected a different model to copy.
It’s difficult to say what the remainder of the Wasp report contains. Another USGS model is mentioned in the title line of Wasp’s report (Au-Ag-Te, which corresponds to Model 22b in USGS Bulletin 1693). If I had to venture a guess, I’d say one of the comparison ore samples that Wasp mentioned is supposedly from this type of deposit, but this is highly speculative. Garry (novice) has touched on this subject in a previous post.4. I suspect Wasp only posted Page 1 of the report for a reason. The info on this page is very typical of a epithermal quartz alunite gold deposit but with one key element that might expose more than desired. Not much "secret" info is exposed here, but one can see the parallel to Dutchman ore in it.
Here’s a link to USGS Bulletin 1693 Model 22b (Au-Ag-Te Veins):
http://pubs.usgs.gov/bul/b1693/Md22b.pdf
All:
I stated in a previous post that Byron R Berger, the author of the 1986 USGS mineral deposit model used as a basis for the Wasp report, referenced the work of RH Ashley, when I should have said RP Ashley. Ashley’s original paper, written in 1982, can be accessed at the following link:
http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/1982/ofr-82-0795/PG144-147.pdf
Larry
Re: The Trail of Jacob Waltz’s Gold Ore
......and a notarized document by a secondary source of a story that has no corroborating witness means what? No disrespect, but you have Brownie just saying this is the story he was told. Does this mean Waltz was really Walzer as Herman said? Maybe thats what he wanted to convey or believed at that time, but it certainly doesn't bear out to any documentation.
Seems like the thread jumped what I would find most interesting.........can we provide any documentation or other evidence that the jewelry was made from ore found under Waltz's bed?
I have asked a single question over 7 years as concerning various samples and It was how the massacre ore stacked against everything else. I got my answers which aren't very satisfying, but it opens yet another can of worms: The one ore that directly should tie to the story is often disregarded in these threads. It would be of interest I think if the ore ties to the Goldfield area or Jewelry ore or neither.
I know something of the answer and can speculate further, but don't want to distract from thread unless this is something of interest in discussing.
Seems like the thread jumped what I would find most interesting.........can we provide any documentation or other evidence that the jewelry was made from ore found under Waltz's bed?
I have asked a single question over 7 years as concerning various samples and It was how the massacre ore stacked against everything else. I got my answers which aren't very satisfying, but it opens yet another can of worms: The one ore that directly should tie to the story is often disregarded in these threads. It would be of interest I think if the ore ties to the Goldfield area or Jewelry ore or neither.
I know something of the answer and can speculate further, but don't want to distract from thread unless this is something of interest in discussing.
"Be Careful of What You Do Before A Lie Becomes The Truth"
Re: The Trail of Jacob Waltz’s Gold Ore
Aw, com’on Wayne. Can’t you just play along? 
You know it is unlikely anyone is going to prove or disprove anything related to the LDM. We all have blind spots and anything presented can be ignored if it doesn’t fit our view.
It was certainly not my intention to imply the Holmes story was a fact. Only that the affidavit and surrounding documents have their own story to tell. I just wanted to see where they led. If we begin with the assumption that the Holmes story is false it is a short trail indeed!
Can we tie Jimmie Douglas to dealings with Gus Hirschfeld?
Who was JL & Co. from the Match Safe inscription?
What did Hirschfeld do to rate a presentation of the Match Safe?
Levy, Porterie, Goldman, etc. How do they tie in or do they?
Did Dr. Glover test and match the ore profile in Hirschfeld’s Match Safe with that of the Holmes Jewelry and ore? Either way it would have some meaningful implications for me.
Since many of the participants are still active in the LDM community, I had hoped we might be able to advance our understanding of the modern history.
Are there photos of the Holmes Jewelry?
How did the watch chains become associated with the story?
Does the Brownie Holmes Tape referenced by Bob Corbin contain references to the Jewelry or other related items? What does Brownie say about the jewelry if anything? Have you heard the tape? (Looking for help!)
Lots of avenues of research and there appear to be a lot of resources.
I would love to hear another proposed trail of Waltz’s gold. Wasp has offered a second trail and it sounds as though you have a third.
Walk us through it, the more detail the better! Who has the massacre ore? How did they come by it?
If you can let the Holmes story lie, I will not question the alleged Peralta mining in the Superstitions, the alleged Peralta-Waltz connection or the alleged Massacre.
Garry
You know it is unlikely anyone is going to prove or disprove anything related to the LDM. We all have blind spots and anything presented can be ignored if it doesn’t fit our view.
It was certainly not my intention to imply the Holmes story was a fact. Only that the affidavit and surrounding documents have their own story to tell. I just wanted to see where they led. If we begin with the assumption that the Holmes story is false it is a short trail indeed!
Can we tie Jimmie Douglas to dealings with Gus Hirschfeld?
Who was JL & Co. from the Match Safe inscription?
What did Hirschfeld do to rate a presentation of the Match Safe?
Levy, Porterie, Goldman, etc. How do they tie in or do they?
Did Dr. Glover test and match the ore profile in Hirschfeld’s Match Safe with that of the Holmes Jewelry and ore? Either way it would have some meaningful implications for me.
Since many of the participants are still active in the LDM community, I had hoped we might be able to advance our understanding of the modern history.
Are there photos of the Holmes Jewelry?
How did the watch chains become associated with the story?
Does the Brownie Holmes Tape referenced by Bob Corbin contain references to the Jewelry or other related items? What does Brownie say about the jewelry if anything? Have you heard the tape? (Looking for help!)
Lots of avenues of research and there appear to be a lot of resources.
I would love to hear another proposed trail of Waltz’s gold. Wasp has offered a second trail and it sounds as though you have a third.
Walk us through it, the more detail the better! Who has the massacre ore? How did they come by it?
If you can let the Holmes story lie, I will not question the alleged Peralta mining in the Superstitions, the alleged Peralta-Waltz connection or the alleged Massacre.
Garry
Re: The Trail of Jacob Waltz’s Gold Ore
We dont seem to hear very much .if anything at all,these days about the Waltz gold ore receipt.Never had much faith in it myself,although of course many did.Has it been shown to be a forgery ?
I apologise if this might be a little off topic.Im a bit too befuddled on Boxing day to work it out
regards to all
I apologise if this might be a little off topic.Im a bit too befuddled on Boxing day to work it out
regards to all
Don update your email address
Re: The Trail of Jacob Waltz’s Gold Ore
Massacre ore? I was not aware that any still existed - I would sure appreciate any PHOTOS you would care to share, thank you in advance!
Oroblanco
Oroblanco
"We must find a way, or we will make one." --Hannibal Barca
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Re: The Trail of Jacob Waltz’s Gold Ore
Don,
"We dont seem to hear very much .if anything at all,these days about the Waltz gold ore receipt.Never had much faith in it myself,although of course many did.Has it been shown to be a forgery ?"
We went about as deep into that subject as a person could get today.
As I recall, the general consensus was that it was a fake. Just the fact that it was for gold ore, as opposed to bullion seemed unlikely.
There are many questionable "facts" concerning the LDM, and creating a market for those facts by purchasing them is an invition to fraud.
Take care,
Joe
"We dont seem to hear very much .if anything at all,these days about the Waltz gold ore receipt.Never had much faith in it myself,although of course many did.Has it been shown to be a forgery ?"
We went about as deep into that subject as a person could get today.
As I recall, the general consensus was that it was a fake. Just the fact that it was for gold ore, as opposed to bullion seemed unlikely.
There are many questionable "facts" concerning the LDM, and creating a market for those facts by purchasing them is an invition to fraud.
Take care,
Joe
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Re: The Trail of Jacob Waltz’s Gold Ore
Roy,
There are many people who claim to have LDM ore. Having been part of researching the history behind the stories, I am inclined to place every single story in the "questionable" file.
On the other hand, I have seen some very nice looking "LDM" ore.
Take care,
Joe
There are many people who claim to have LDM ore. Having been part of researching the history behind the stories, I am inclined to place every single story in the "questionable" file.
On the other hand, I have seen some very nice looking "LDM" ore.
Take care,
Joe
Re: The Trail of Jacob Waltz’s Gold Ore
Hello All:
For those still looking into this thread, here's a little more information that ties into the report posted by Wasp.
THE BIBLE ON THE LOST DUTCHMAN GOLD MINE AND JACOB WALTZ
(Helen Corbin, Wolfe Publishing Company, 2002, page 289)
Item #10 in the list entitled:
"The following items have been discovered in the area known today as Peter's Mesa by William Edwards, Ben Edwards and Mathew Roberts"
"Discovered walled up in a small natural hole in the rock face of a ledge was 19.75 lbs. of quartz/gold concentrate. The quartz appears to have been broken
down by hand into smaller pieces of a more concentrated (valuable) form, eliminating weight and reducing the size of the overall load. The gold content has
been assayed and the quartz/gold analyzed for mineral content. These findings are recorded in my files as (assay report number 26) and (Crissmon and
Nichols analysis report no. 26).
The ore concentrated ratio ranged from 55 to 70 percent Au. gold content with native Ag. (silver) present (and visible) in the ore at (+ or -) 1.3 percent.
Au. Gold content established at 11.455 lbs. at 996 fine.
Ag. Native Silver content established at 0.144 lbs. at 997 fine.
Location of the discovery site, photo of the ore and site, and the account thereof is listed in my files under (Site #20)."
Hope this helps.
Larry
For those still looking into this thread, here's a little more information that ties into the report posted by Wasp.
THE BIBLE ON THE LOST DUTCHMAN GOLD MINE AND JACOB WALTZ
(Helen Corbin, Wolfe Publishing Company, 2002, page 289)
Item #10 in the list entitled:
"The following items have been discovered in the area known today as Peter's Mesa by William Edwards, Ben Edwards and Mathew Roberts"
"Discovered walled up in a small natural hole in the rock face of a ledge was 19.75 lbs. of quartz/gold concentrate. The quartz appears to have been broken
down by hand into smaller pieces of a more concentrated (valuable) form, eliminating weight and reducing the size of the overall load. The gold content has
been assayed and the quartz/gold analyzed for mineral content. These findings are recorded in my files as (assay report number 26) and (Crissmon and
Nichols analysis report no. 26).
The ore concentrated ratio ranged from 55 to 70 percent Au. gold content with native Ag. (silver) present (and visible) in the ore at (+ or -) 1.3 percent.
Au. Gold content established at 11.455 lbs. at 996 fine.
Ag. Native Silver content established at 0.144 lbs. at 997 fine.
Location of the discovery site, photo of the ore and site, and the account thereof is listed in my files under (Site #20)."
Hope this helps.
Larry
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Re: The Trail of Jacob Waltz’s Gold Ore
Larry,
"The following items have been discovered in the area known today as Peter's Mesa by William Edwards, Ben Edwards and Mathew Roberts"
Do you know if all three men were sources for that story? Can't recall.
Take care,
Joe
"The following items have been discovered in the area known today as Peter's Mesa by William Edwards, Ben Edwards and Mathew Roberts"
Do you know if all three men were sources for that story? Can't recall.
Take care,
Joe
Re: The Trail of Jacob Waltz’s Gold Ore
Joe:
Helen Corbin was not explicit in the source for this particular line item (#10). However, the implication is that it (along with the other 9 items in the list) came from either the Roberts or Edwards family notes.
Since the line item specifies the Crissmon and Nichols analysis (and even more specifically, assay report number 26, which is the same number that appears on the Wasp document), I would have to say that the source was contemporary, based primarily on the investigation Garry did on the Crissmon and Nichols business and the time window that the report could possibly have been generated (see Garry’s earlier posts).
Then of course, there is the issue about the generic deposit model and when the specific wording in that model became available. As you know, the wording of the model is reproduced in the Wasp document, and this causes a conflict in the time line.
As for who actually discovered the 19.75 pounds of quartz/gold concentrate on or near Peter’s Mesa, I have no idea. I suppose that part of the story could have come from anybody, with the "analysis" being performed many years later?
Larry
Helen Corbin was not explicit in the source for this particular line item (#10). However, the implication is that it (along with the other 9 items in the list) came from either the Roberts or Edwards family notes.
Since the line item specifies the Crissmon and Nichols analysis (and even more specifically, assay report number 26, which is the same number that appears on the Wasp document), I would have to say that the source was contemporary, based primarily on the investigation Garry did on the Crissmon and Nichols business and the time window that the report could possibly have been generated (see Garry’s earlier posts).
Then of course, there is the issue about the generic deposit model and when the specific wording in that model became available. As you know, the wording of the model is reproduced in the Wasp document, and this causes a conflict in the time line.
As for who actually discovered the 19.75 pounds of quartz/gold concentrate on or near Peter’s Mesa, I have no idea. I suppose that part of the story could have come from anybody, with the "analysis" being performed many years later?
Larry
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Re: The Trail of Jacob Waltz’s Gold Ore
Larry,
I will need to reread that portion of Helen's book and see if she references a year for that discovery. That could make all the difference in the world, knowing what we know.
Take care,
Joe
I will need to reread that portion of Helen's book and see if she references a year for that discovery. That could make all the difference in the world, knowing what we know.
Take care,
Joe
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Re: The Trail of Jacob Waltz’s Gold Ore
Larry,
Having gone back over page 289, I believe you are correct in saying that nothing is specifically attributed to Kraig Roberts. For me, what ties him to #10, is the Crismon and Nichols analysis report. Somewhere, probably from you or Garry, I have seen comments by Kraig in regard to that report.
I can see where it's also possible that the ore was found by Ben or William Edwards, and was assayed at a latter date. If that's the case, I wonder what was found that is credited to Kraig (Matthew) Roberts.
It would be interesting to know what became of that ore, or even see some pictures.
Take care,
Joe
Having gone back over page 289, I believe you are correct in saying that nothing is specifically attributed to Kraig Roberts. For me, what ties him to #10, is the Crismon and Nichols analysis report. Somewhere, probably from you or Garry, I have seen comments by Kraig in regard to that report.
I can see where it's also possible that the ore was found by Ben or William Edwards, and was assayed at a latter date. If that's the case, I wonder what was found that is credited to Kraig (Matthew) Roberts.
It would be interesting to know what became of that ore, or even see some pictures.
Take care,
Joe
Re: The Trail of Jacob Waltz’s Gold Ore
Joe/All:
I doubt the ore/gold concentrate is still in its original form, since a specific weight of the gold and silver is given in the line item (#10). The only way those values could have been determined would have been to totally separate out the gold and silver from the host rock.
The gold, coming in at 11.455 pounds, equated to 58% of the original 19.75 pound stash (within the 55 to 70% range established by the assay). Of course, that doesn’t mean much because it is made clear the ore had already gone through some type of processing or reduction to eliminate weight, getting it to that concentration artificially.
The line item makes it clear that there were two reports. One report was an assay, establishing the purity/concentration of the gold (and probably the end weight). The second report established the mineral content of the host rock. It is this second report that related to the Crissmon and Nichols effort, and is presumably the same report that was posted by Wasp.
(It is not beyond reason that Crissmon and Nichols would have also performed the assay test, but that would only be speculation)
Still, the line item in Helen’s book indicates that pictures were taken of both the ore and the find site, so with some digging perhaps you’ll be able to see what the ore looked like before processing. Let us know if you hit pay dirt (heh-heh).
I believe it had been speculated in a long-ago thread on either the defunct forum (or perhaps this one?) that the map on page 170 of Helen’s book could possibly indicate the various sites mentioned on the pages we’re discussing (pages 287 through 289). The map is of the Peter’s Mesa area with random dots hand-drawn in at various locations. There is no supporting text for the map, and the map is not annotated.
If this is the master map related to the Roberts/Edwards family notes, showing the locations of various “finds” on or near Peter’s Mesa, it is likely that the site of the find we’re discussing is represented by one of the dots.
Keep in mind that a find site really means very little as far as determining the source of any gold that had been stashed there.
The last complete paragraph on page 353 of Helen’s book makes particular mention of the overlapping caldera ring fractures that run through Pistol Canyon and probably relates to the subject we’re discussing (I say this because the Crissmon and Nichols report specifically called out the Tortilla Caldera).
Of course, I’m at a loss for how stashed gold ore can be tied to the calderas, unless the implication is that the gold ore was found in-place somewhere nearby, mined and partially processed, and then stashed where it was ultimately found.
Larry
I doubt the ore/gold concentrate is still in its original form, since a specific weight of the gold and silver is given in the line item (#10). The only way those values could have been determined would have been to totally separate out the gold and silver from the host rock.
The gold, coming in at 11.455 pounds, equated to 58% of the original 19.75 pound stash (within the 55 to 70% range established by the assay). Of course, that doesn’t mean much because it is made clear the ore had already gone through some type of processing or reduction to eliminate weight, getting it to that concentration artificially.
The line item makes it clear that there were two reports. One report was an assay, establishing the purity/concentration of the gold (and probably the end weight). The second report established the mineral content of the host rock. It is this second report that related to the Crissmon and Nichols effort, and is presumably the same report that was posted by Wasp.
(It is not beyond reason that Crissmon and Nichols would have also performed the assay test, but that would only be speculation)
Still, the line item in Helen’s book indicates that pictures were taken of both the ore and the find site, so with some digging perhaps you’ll be able to see what the ore looked like before processing. Let us know if you hit pay dirt (heh-heh).
I believe it had been speculated in a long-ago thread on either the defunct forum (or perhaps this one?) that the map on page 170 of Helen’s book could possibly indicate the various sites mentioned on the pages we’re discussing (pages 287 through 289). The map is of the Peter’s Mesa area with random dots hand-drawn in at various locations. There is no supporting text for the map, and the map is not annotated.
If this is the master map related to the Roberts/Edwards family notes, showing the locations of various “finds” on or near Peter’s Mesa, it is likely that the site of the find we’re discussing is represented by one of the dots.
Keep in mind that a find site really means very little as far as determining the source of any gold that had been stashed there.
The last complete paragraph on page 353 of Helen’s book makes particular mention of the overlapping caldera ring fractures that run through Pistol Canyon and probably relates to the subject we’re discussing (I say this because the Crissmon and Nichols report specifically called out the Tortilla Caldera).
Of course, I’m at a loss for how stashed gold ore can be tied to the calderas, unless the implication is that the gold ore was found in-place somewhere nearby, mined and partially processed, and then stashed where it was ultimately found.
Larry
Re: The Trail of Jacob Waltz’s Gold Ore
All,
There has recently been a discussion about the origin of the famous Jacob Waltz ore match safe on TNET.
I was rereading this post and we went into the weeds from the original topic and quickly began to get on each others nerves.
I think there is still some worth while information that some may find interesting.
Larry Hannah and I have collected alot of additional information on the players mentioned in the affidavit but have never gotten around to following it up with posts on the forum.Maybe some day.
if anyone choses to read the thread, they are about to enter a morass of fabrications, agendas, and "perhaps" even some useful information. That will be left for the reader to figure out which is which.
Garry
There has recently been a discussion about the origin of the famous Jacob Waltz ore match safe on TNET.
I was rereading this post and we went into the weeds from the original topic and quickly began to get on each others nerves.
I think there is still some worth while information that some may find interesting.
Larry Hannah and I have collected alot of additional information on the players mentioned in the affidavit but have never gotten around to following it up with posts on the forum.Maybe some day.
if anyone choses to read the thread, they are about to enter a morass of fabrications, agendas, and "perhaps" even some useful information. That will be left for the reader to figure out which is which.
Garry