Search Documents

LIST OF THE MEETINGS OF THE INSTITUTE AND THEIR LOCALITIES FROM ITS ORGANIZATION Transactions Number Place Date Vol Page 1 Wilkes-Barre, Pa May, ?71 1 3 2 Bethlehem, Pa August, ?71 1 10 3 Troy, N Y November, ?71 1 13 4 Philadelphia, Pa February, ?72 1 17 5 New York, N Y May, ?72 1 20 6 Pittsburg, Pa October, ?72 1 25 7 Boston, Mass February, ?73 1 28 8 Philadelphia, Pa May, ?73 2 3 9 Easton, Pa October, ?73 2 7 10 New York, N Y February, ?74 211 11 St Louis, Mo May, ?74 3 3 12 Hazleton, Pa October, ?74 3 8 13 New Haven, Conn February, ?75 3 15 14 Dover, N J May, ?75 4 3 15 Cleveland, 0 October, ?75 4 9 16 Washington, D C February, ?76 4 18 17 Philadelphia, Pat June, ?76, 5 3 18 Philadelphia, Pa October, ?76 5 9 19 New York, N Y February, ?77 5 27 20 Wilkes-Barre, Pa May, ?77 6 3 21 Amenia, N Y October, ?77 6 10 22 Philadelphia, Pa. May, ?78 6 18 23 Chattanooga, Tenn May ?78 7 3 24 Lake George, N.Y. Oct. ?78 7 25 Baltimore, Md. Feb. ?79 7 26 Pittsburgh Pa, May ?79 8 27 Montreal, Canada Sept, ?79 8 28 New York, N.Y. Feb, ?80 9 29 Lake Superior, Mich Aug, ?80

Jan 1, 1923

COUNCIL OF ECONOMICS OF AIME Formerly Mineral Economics Division Established as a Division December 15, 1948 Established as a Council February 26, 1957 Franz R Dykstra, Chairman Paul Schultz, Vice-Chairman A J Phillips, Vice-Chairman Douglas Donald, Vice-Chairman J S Vanick, Contact AIME Director A H Lindley, Jr, Secretary-Treasurer Lehman Brothers 1 William Street New York 4, N Y COUNCIL OF EDUCATION OF AIME Formerly Mineral Industry Education Division Established as a Division January 15, 1932 Established as a Council February 26, 1957 0 Cutler Shepard,Chairman Lysle E Shaffer, Vice-Chairman John C Calhoun, Jr, Past Chairman J C Kinnear, Jr, Contact AIME Director J D Forrester, Secretary-Treasurer College of Mines Univ of Arizona Tucson, Arizona

Jan 1, 1958

By Chung Yu, Wang

CHINA can he roughly divided into three metallogenetic province: North China, the Yangtze Valley, and South China. In North China the old Pre-Cambrian schists and gneisses are represented by the abundance of quartz mines in which sporadic occurrences of copper, lead, zinc, gold, and silver are sometimes found in subordinate quantities. Along the Yangtze Valley and in Central China, extending eastward as far as Shantung, are found here and there intrusions of dioritic rocks, in which occur the famous contact deposits of iron ore, besides which minor quantities of copper. lead, and zinc are also found. In South China the igneous intrunsions are of granitoid type in which, or in the vicinity of which, occur in certain regions immense deposits of antimony, tungsten, tin, and mercury. Broadly speaking. most of the famous coal mines are now situated in regions north of the Yangtze River, in which occur also the sedimentary deposits of iron in contradistinction to the contact deposits of iron along the Yangtze Valley.

Jan 1, 1943

By T. H. Oxnam

INTRODUCTION. THE predominating value of the ores now being treated by the Palmarejo and Mexican Gold Fields, Ltd., is silver, although some gold is also carried. The present method of treatment consists of wet-crushing and concentrating, followed by the cyanidation of the unroasted sands and slimes. The sands are treated by leaching and the so-called accumulated slimes by a system of agitation and decantation. It is only within very recent years that the cyanidation of unroasted silver-ores has been commercially successful. In fact, at the time operations were begun at the cyanide-plant at Chinipas, February, 1902, I knew of no other leaching-plant treating similar ores successfully. The cyanide treatment of the Palmarejo ores differs but little from the ordinary practice in cyaniding gold-ores; and perhaps but little, if any, new information concerning the metallurgy of silver is to be gleaned from it. PALMAREJO MINE. The Palmarejo mines are located in the southwestern part of the State of Chihuahua, Mexico, on the foothills of the Sierra Madre mountains, at an elevation of 3,200 feet. The mills, 12. miles distant, are situated on the Chinipas river, near the town of Chinipas, which is about 150 miles northeast of Agiabampo, on the Gulf of California. Supplies are shipped via this port as this route is the best and most direct to the property. The ore-bodies in the Palmarejo mines have been deposited. along a series of rock-fractures, caused by an intrusion of eruptive rock. The most important of these fractures or fissures, both in width and value, are the Prieta and Blanca veins, which.

Jul 1, 1905

By C. F., Christopher

The purpose of any steel-making process is to convert the two raw materials iron and scrap into steel. The chemical analysis of the steel is set within certain limits which involve the physical proper- ties desired by the consumer. In addition to tensile properties a large number of other properties are at the present time desired, such as impact resistance, grain size regulation, specific degrees of hardenability, resistance to creep at high temperatures, resistance to expansion on heat treatment, the ability of the product to undergo extreme amounts of cold deformation without failure, and many other properties which are not directly related to the specified chemical analysis. Variations in many of the properties of plain-carbon steels are due to elements and compounds not included in the ordinary "five element"§ composition. Such variations result primarily from variations in oxidation of the metal in the furnace and from the deoxidation method employed. The steel-making problem therefore resolves itself into two distinct sections: (I) the elimination of certain elements from the charge (the iron and scrap entering the furnace) and the addition of materials to meet the chemical specifications for the heat; (2) the manipulation of the slag and metal and the process of deoxidation to give certain desired properties in the steel entirely apart from the chemical analysis specified. Each of 'these two ends must be attained

Jan 1, 1957

By Nelson P. Hulst

COMMITTEES. DULUTH.-Nelson P. Hulst, Chairman; J. B. Adams, W. C. Agnew, M. H. Alworth, C. W. Andrews, R. Angst, William R. Appleby, C. E. Bailey, G. G. Barnum, E. F. Bradt, Mylie Bunnell, George L. Cheesebrough, Peter Christen¬sen, F. A. Cokefair, T. F. Cole, C. A. Congdon, N. Cowling, George H. Crosby, M. D. Cullum, C. d'Autremont, Jr., H. L. Dresser, C. T. Fairbairn. Walter Fitch, F. L. Gilbert, J. T. Hale, G. G. Hartley, E. B. Hawkins, M. S. Hawkins, J. H. Hearding, Louis Hill, L. J. Hopkins, F. E. House, J. C. Hunter, 0. D. Kinney, J. W. Kreitter, E. J. Longyear, Alexander McDougal, W. A. McGonagle, A. M. Marshall, W. N. Merriam, T. D. Merrill, John Millan, P. Mitchell, Clarence Moore, Hon. Page Morris, C. H. Munger, Henry Nolte, W. J. Olcott, A. L. Ordean, Thomas Owens, F. A. Patrick, H. M. Peyton; D. M. Philbin, Capt. Charles Potter (U. S. A.), L. W. Powell, Harry Roberts, Louis Rouchleau, George A. St. Clair, J. U. Sebenius, Joseph Sellwood, Amos Shepherd, W. B. Silvey, George Spencer, George C. Stone, H. B. Sturtevant, George D. Swift, Kirby Thomas, C. D. Thompson, A. D. Thomson, G. A. Tomlinson, Charles Trezona, R. R. Trezona, Maj. J. H. Upham, Charles Van Barneveld, W. W. Walker, J. L. Washburn, A. C. Weirs, H. J. Wessinger, A. B. Wolvin, Dwight E. Woodbridge. HOUGHTON.-W. E. Parnall, Chairman; W. D. Calverley, Secretary; W. B. Anderson, L. S. Austin, Jacob Baer, William Bath, F. J. Bawden., Simon Beahan, John Been, C. H. Benedict, Walter Bloomfield, S. H. Brady, Samuel Brady, Henry Brett, A. L. Burgan, F. I. Cairns, W. H. Cake, Arthur L. Carnahan, William Carpenter, Phillip Carroll, John J. Case, T. L. Chadbourne, W. A. Childs, B. F. Chynoweth, Captain James Chynoweth, H. P. Clausen, F. G. Coggin, H. D. Conant, J. B. Cooper, J. R. Cooper, John Cuddihy, Thomas Cummings, Robert Davidson, J. B. Dee, J. R. Dee, T. S. Dee, Theodore Dengler, M. M. Dennis, Captain Thomas Dennis,. F. W. Denton, A. D. Edwards, R. M. Edwards, C. S. Fales, Daniel Fisher, Henry Fisher, James Fisher, A. L. Floeter, Frank H. Getchell, M. C. Getchell, W. M. Gibson, W. M. Gilliland, James G. Glanville, George Goodale, H. S. Goodell, A. R. Gray, Edward Grierson, Homer Guck, H. D. Haddock, Captain Josiah Hall, John L. Harris, Captain S. B. Har¬ris, Enos Harrold, F. William Hartmann, George L. Heath, C. M. Hoar, Thomas Hoatson, 0. P. Hood, Captain Thomas Hooper, Captain Joshua D. Husking, Dr. L. L. Hubbard, Arno Jaelinig, E. D. Johnson, G. A. Koenig, Edward Koepel, C. H. Krause, R. H. Leach, A. W. Leonard, James MacNaughton, Edward McCormick, Thomas McDonald, R. T. McKeever, F. W. McNair, James McRae, John Mackey, John C. Mann, Major G. A. Marr, Captain Thomas Maslin, Harry Mercer, James Merton, Michael Messner, William F. Miller, Captain J. Milligan, Dr. J. W. Moore, Charles H. Moss, H. F. Nickerson, Charles L. Noetzel, P. H. Paine, John Penrose, Captain John Pentecost, Graham Pope, R. C. Pryor, James Ramsay, J. T. Reeder, Allen F. Rees, J. H. Rice, W. G. Rice, James

Jan 1, 1905

By A Guinier

RECIPITATION in alloys is undoubtedly one of the most essential phase transformations in metallurgy and, besides, it is a phenomenon of great interest to physicists. It seems then that it can be chosen as a topic for an Annual IMD Lecture. Of course, the subject is a very wide one and I shall discuss here only a very restricted part of it. I should like to show why it is now considered that there is, at the beginning of the process, a stage distinct from the real precipitation, which is the pre-precipitation. We shall be chiefly interested in the atomic structure of the metal in this preprecipi-tation stage. Numerous reviews on this subject have been published recently.', ' The latest was given by H. K. Hardyh t the last meeting of the Institute of Metals in London. One of the most complete articles has been written by the late Dr. Geisler." I should like, at the beginning of this lecture, to pay a tribute to the memory of our friend Arthur Geisler. Some of the ideas which will be developed here are different from those advocated by him. But everybody knows the considerable progress in experiment and in theory which we owe to him and, personally, I deeply feel how fruitful have been the long discussions which we have had during many years. Experimental Basis of the Precipitation Problems Let us recall the essential facts pertaining to the problem of the precipitation. The starting point and the final one are well known. The initial stage is the supersaturated solid solution before quenching. The dissolved atoms replace some of the atoms of the solvent at the points of a definite lattice. It is generally considered that the distribution of the atoms is completely random, and that the lattice distortions are relatively weak. These assumptions are only an approximation. It has now beenproven", that, in some cases, the dissolved atoms have a tendency to segregate to form very small nuclei. These fluctuations of composition are greater than the normal statistical fluctuations in a purely random alloy. We shall see the role played by these nuclei later. The final state is obtained by a very long annealing at such a temperature that an equilibrium is reached in a reasonable time. The alloy is then composed of a matrix which is a saturated solid solution, much poorer than the initial one. Imbedded

Jan 1, 1957

By OWEN H. PERRY

One of man's primary tools is the ordinary screen. Whether of mesh or punched plate, it is fundamental in principle, primitive in its origin, and common in its application through all the world; and yet the screen goes only a part of the way toward the completion of its job of separating materials according to size. It will give a practical and continuous separation according to "size," as generally understood (accurate according to the breadth), but the accurate and continuous separation as to thickness is not a practical function of the screen. Still, all through history, the thickness of particles of material must have been important to many people; therefore, one would expect that some standard method of sizing for thickness would long since have been evolved and that equipment applying that method would be readily available to any in¬dustry. This, however, seems not to be so.

Jan 1, 1949

By T. F. Witherbee

THE Fletcherville Furnace was built in 1864 and 1865, making its first blast from August until October of the latter year, when it was blown out to prevent its "bunging-up." Repairs were made in time to enable it to be blown in again December 12th, 1865, the blast ending October 7th, 1866. Total product 1921.15 tons iron, an average of 6.8.2.5 tons per day, from ores yielding 44.8 per cent. Consumption of charcoal 223.2 bushels per ton of iron. The furnace journal up to this time shows no record of furnace dimen¬sions, or temperature of the blast, but as near as can be ascertained, they were as follows, viz. Height of stack, 42 feet. Diameter of bosh, 11 feet. Angle of bosh, 7 1/2 inches to 12 inches rise, about 58°. Diameter of open tunnel head, 42 inches. Number of tuyeres 3; each 3 inches in diameter. Dam 15 inches high. Tuyeres 24 inches high. Tymp 22 1/2 inches high. Diameter of steam cylinder, 20 1/4 inches. Stroke 5 feet. Diameter of blast cylinder, 64 inches. The engine is direct-acting horizontal non-condensing. December 26th, 1.866, the furnace was again put in blast, having been considerably altered in the crucible; the height of stack, bosh, and tunnel head remaining as before. Six tuyeres were put in, three in each of the side arches. The hearth or crucible was rectangular in form, 3 feet wide x 32 feet long x 62 feet high. Inclination of bosh 58°. Height of tuyeres 26 inches ; nozzles 2 1/4 inches diameter. Temperature of blast estimated to be about 500°.

Jan 1, 1874

By C. C. Harris Discussion by B. K. Loveday

B. K. Loveday (National Institute for Metallurgy, Johannesburg, Republic of South Africa) - The paper and subsequent technical note' describing a method of determining the parameters of the three-parameter size-distribution equation developed in the paper were read with much interest. This equation was also used at National Institute for Metallurgy (NIM) to describe size distributions in grinding tests, because it was necessary to have a single equation to describe the size distribution at any time during a test. A graphical method also was used to determine the three parameters, and the use of this method as an alternative to Professor Harris's latest method is discussed here. The three-parameter model can be expressed as follows: Eq. 1 can be rearranged and transformed to Yield a linear reiationship between Y and X (transformed) log

Jan 1, 1970

This consolidated index covers all publications of the Institute for the years 1926 through 1935. The following list indicates subjects of volumes and gives numbers or abbreviations used to designate them. TRANSACTIONS VOLUME *G26. Petroleum Development and Technology in 1925 (Published in 1926). *G26. Petroleum Development and Technology in 1926. *E27. Institute of Metals Proceedings. 73. Nonferrous Metallurgy, Milling and Concentration, Nonmetallic Minerals, Institute of Metals and Iron and Steel. [ ]

Jan 1, 1936

Organization Place Date 1919 American Society of Civil Engineers..: Twin Cities, Minn. June 17-20 American Society of Mechanical Engineers Detroit, Mich. June 17-20 American Institute of Chemical Engineers Boston, Mass. June 18-21 American Drop. Forge Association Pittsburgh, Pa June 19-21 American Institute of Electrical Engineers Lake Placid, N. Y. June 24-27 American Society for Testing Materials Atlantic City, N. J. June 24-27 Society for Prom. of Engng. Education Baltimore, Md. June 25-28 American Chemical Society Philadelpia, Pa. Sept. 2-6 National Assn. of Stationary Engineers Huntington, W. Va. Sept. 8 American Peat Society.. Minneapolis, Minn. Sept. 22-24 American Iron; Steel Electrical Engineers St. Louis, Mo. Sept. 22-26 American Institute of Min. and Met. Engineers, Chicago, Ill. Sept. 22-27

Jan 6, 1919

LIST OF THE MEETINGS OF THE INSTITUTE AND THEIR LOCALITIES FROM ITS ORGANIZATION Transactions Number Place Date Vol Page 1 Wilkes-Barre, Pa May, ?71 1 3 2 Bethlehem, Pa August, ?71 1 10 3 Troy, N Y November, ?71 1 13 4 Philadelphia, Pa February, ?72 1 17 5 New York, N Y May, ?72 1 20 6 Pittsburg, Pa October, ?72 1 25 7 Boston, Mass February, ?73 1 28 8 Philadelphia, Pa May, ?73 2 3 9 Easton, Pa October, ?73 2 7 10 New York, N Y February, ?74 211 11 St Louis, Mo May, ?74 3 3 12 Hazleton, Pa October, ?74 3 8 13 New Haven, Conn February, ?75 3 15 14 Dover, N J May, ?75 4 3 15 Cleveland, 0 October, ?75 4 9 16 Washington, D C February, ?76 4 18 17 Philadelphia, Pat June, ?76, 5 3 18 Philadelphia, Pa October, ?76 5 9 19 New York, N Y February, ?77 5 27 20 Wilkes-Barre, Pa May, ?77 6 3 21 Amenia, N Y October, ?77 6 10 22 Philadelphia, Pa. May, ?78 6 18 23 Chattanooga, Tenn May ?78 7 3 24 Lake George, N.Y. Oct. ?78 7 25 Baltimore, Md. Feb. ?79 7 26 Pittsburgh Pa, May ?79 8 27 Montreal, Canada Sept, ?79 8 28 New York, N.Y. Feb, ?80 9 29 Lake Superior, Mich Aug, ?80 9 30 Philadelphia, Pa. Feb, 81 9 31 Staunton, Va May, 81 10 32 Harrisburg, Pa Feb, 81 10

Jan 1, 1952

THREE regional meetings are planned for this summer and fall following the spring meeting held under the auspices of the Iron and Steel Committee and the Ohio Section at Cleveland in April and in lieu of a general fall meeting of the Institute. Plans for all of them are maturing rapidly. Excellent programs and. interesting visits to points of local tech¬nical interest are already assured. THE SALT LAKE CITY MEETING This meeting will be under the auspices of the Milling Committee and the Utah Section. It will be one of the features of the joint convention held the week of August 22 to 26 with the Western Division of the American Mining Congress. The Congress will be responsible for the general arrangements and for the program on the first day. The following general committees have been appointed:

Jan 7, 1927

By W. H. Hough, P. B. Leavenworth

Development during 1942 led to the discovery of 26 new fields in the Texas Gulf Coast, as compared with 27 during 1941. Of these, 19 are classed as oil fields, 4 distillate fields, and 3 gas fields. Production from the new fields amounted to 614,467 bbl. to October 1942. Producing Sections.—Discoveries in I942, compared with the previous two years, classified by producing formations, are shown in the following table: It is interesting to note the increase in Wilcox discoveries due to the extensive geophysical campaign that has been con. ducted since 1940. Drilling.—During the year 688 wells were drilled, of which 574 produced oil or gas and 114 were dry. This represents a considerable decline in activity over the previous year, when 1405 wells were drilled in the area, of which 1081 were producers and 324 failures. Jackson County continued to hold the lead, with 222 wells completed. Production.—-Despite curtailed drilling, production amounted to 118,009,451 bbl. for 1942, indicating a slight increase over the 113,726,893 bbl. produced during 1941. The statistics in Tables I and 2 include condensate and distillate as oil production, because many Gulf Coast fields produce oils with a wide variation of specific gravities, all of which are commingled in pipe lines. Table 3 shows by counties most of the activities referred to. The number of wells drilled includes only field wells; not wildcats. Outstanding Fields of 1942 The Texas Gulf Coast covered in this report has 270 more or less active oil and gas fields, including the new discoveries of 1942. Of these the most outstanding from the standpoint of production are listed in Table 4. Each of these fields produced one million barrels or more during 1942. Some of the fields where new extensions are occasionally referred to as separate fields, such as West Columbia and New West Columbia, or Thompson and South Thompson, are combined to give a more accurate outline. Two interesting facts may be noted from this list of some 26 oil fields: (I) that the Lolita field, Jackson County, is the only discovery since 1938 to produce more than one million barrels annually, although there have been 79 discoveries since Jan. I, 1940; (2) that 20 of these 26 fields produce from the Frio. New Fields ALief, Harris County.—Pure Oil Company's No. I Mike Albanese was drilled to 8637 ft. in Cook Mountain shale. After numerous tests the well was completed on Apr. 20, 1942, in a Yegua sand at 7919 to 7924 ft. for 54 bbl. of 52' gravity oil and 3,335,000 cu. ft. of gas through

Jan 1, 1943

By W. H. Hough, P. B. Leavenworth

Development during 1942 led to the discovery of 26 new fields in the Texas Gulf Coast, as compared with 27 during 1941. Of these, 19 are classed as oil fields, 4 distillate fields, and 3 gas fields. Production from the new fields amounted to 614,467 bbl. to October 1942. Producing Sections.—Discoveries in I942, compared with the previous two years, classified by producing formations, are shown in the following table: It is interesting to note the increase in Wilcox discoveries due to the extensive geophysical campaign that has been con. ducted since 1940. Drilling.—During the year 688 wells were drilled, of which 574 produced oil or gas and 114 were dry. This represents a considerable decline in activity over the previous year, when 1405 wells were drilled in the area, of which 1081 were producers and 324 failures. Jackson County continued to hold the lead, with 222 wells completed. Production.—-Despite curtailed drilling, production amounted to 118,009,451 bbl. for 1942, indicating a slight increase over the 113,726,893 bbl. produced during 1941. The statistics in Tables I and 2 include condensate and distillate as oil production, because many Gulf Coast fields produce oils with a wide variation of specific gravities, all of which are commingled in pipe lines. Table 3 shows by counties most of the activities referred to. The number of wells drilled includes only field wells; not wildcats. Outstanding Fields of 1942 The Texas Gulf Coast covered in this report has 270 more or less active oil and gas fields, including the new discoveries of 1942. Of these the most outstanding from the standpoint of production are listed in Table 4. Each of these fields produced one million barrels or more during 1942. Some of the fields where new extensions are occasionally referred to as separate fields, such as West Columbia and New West Columbia, or Thompson and South Thompson, are combined to give a more accurate outline. Two interesting facts may be noted from this list of some 26 oil fields: (I) that the Lolita field, Jackson County, is the only discovery since 1938 to produce more than one million barrels annually, although there have been 79 discoveries since Jan. I, 1940; (2) that 20 of these 26 fields produce from the Frio. New Fields ALief, Harris County.—Pure Oil Company's No. I Mike Albanese was drilled to 8637 ft. in Cook Mountain shale. After numerous tests the well was completed on Apr. 20, 1942, in a Yegua sand at 7919 to 7924 ft. for 54 bbl. of 52' gravity oil and 3,335,000 cu. ft. of gas through

Jan 1, 1943

LIST OF THE MEETINGS OF THE INSTITUTE AND THEIR LOCALITIES FROM ITS ORGANIZATION Transactions Number Place Date Vol Page 1 Wilkes-Barre, Pa May, ?71 1 3 2 Bethlehem, Pa August, ?71 1 10 3 Troy, N Y November, ?71 1 13 4 Philadelphia, Pa February, ?72 1 17 5 New York, N Y May, ?72 1 20 6 Pittsburg, Pa October, ?72 1 25 7 Boston, Mass February, ?73 1 28 8 Philadelphia, Pa May, ?73 2 3 9 Easton, Pa October, ?73 2 7 10 New York, N Y February, ?74 211 11 St Louis, Mo May, ?74 3 3 12 Hazleton, Pa October, ?74 3 8 13 New Haven, Conn February, ?75 3 15 14 Dover, N J May, ?75 4 3 15 Cleveland, 0 October, ?75 4 9 16 Washington, D C February, ?76 4 18 17 Philadelphia, Pat June, ?76, 5 3 18 Philadelphia, Pa October, ?76 5 9 19 New York, N Y February, ?77 5 27 20 Wilkes-Barre, Pa May, ?77 6 3 21 Amenia, N Y October, ?77 6 10 22 Philadelphia, Pa. May, ?78 6 18 23 Chattanooga, Tenn May ?78 7 3 24 Lake George, N.Y. Oct. ?78 7 25 Baltimore, Md. Feb. ?79 7 26 Pittsburgh Pa, May ?79 8 27 Montreal, Canada Sept, ?79 8 28 New York, N.Y. Feb, ?80 9 29 Lake Superior, Mich Aug, ?80 9 30 Philadelphia, Pa. Feb, 81 9 31 Staunton, Va May, 81 10 32 Harrisburg, Pa Feb, 81 10

Jan 1, 1937

LIST OF THE MEETINGS OF THE INSTITUTE AND THEIR LOCALITIES FROM ITS ORGANIZATION Transactions Number Place Date Vol Page 1 Wilkes-Barre, Pa May, ?71 1 3 2 Bethlehem, Pa August, ?71 1 10 3 Troy, N Y November, ?71 1 13 4 Philadelphia, Pa February, ?72 1 17 5 New York, N Y May, ?72 1 20 6 Pittsburgh, Pa October, ?72 1 25 7 Boston, Mass February, ?73 1 28 8 Philadelphia, Pa May, ?73 2 3 9 Easton, Pa October, ?73 2 7 10 New York, N Y February, ?74 211 11 St Louis, Mo May, ?74 3 3 12 Hazleton, Pa October, ?74 3 8 13 New Haven, Conn February, ?75 3 15 14 Dover, N J May, ?75 4 3 15 Cleveland, 0 October, ?75 4 9 16 Washington, D C February, ?76 4 18 17 Philadelphia, Pat June, ?76, 5 3 18 Philadelphia, Pa October, ?76 5 9 19 New York, N Y February, ?77 5 27 20 Wilkes-Barre, Pa May, ?77 6 3 21 Amenia, N Y October, ?77 6 10 22 Philadelphia, Pa. May, ?78 6 18 23 Chattanooga, Tenn May ?78 7 3 24 Lake George, N.Y. Oct. ?78 7 25 Baltimore, Md. Feb. ?79 7 26 Pittsburgh Pa, May ?79 8 27 Montreal, Canada Sept, ?79 8 28 New York, N.Y. Feb, ?80 9 29 Lake Superior, Mich Aug, ?80 9 30 Philadelphia, Pa. Feb, 81 9 31 Staunton, Va May, 81 10 32 Harrisburg, Pa Feb, 81 10

Jan 1, 1923

LIST OF THE MEETINGS OF THE INSTITUTE AND THEIR LOCALITIES FROM ITS ORGANIZATION Transactions Number Place Date Vol Page 1 Wilkes-Barre, Pa May, ?71 1 3 2 Bethlehem, Pa August, ?71 1 10 3 Troy, N Y November, ?71 1 13 4 Philadelphia, Pa February, ?72 1 17 5 New York, N Y May, ?72 1 20 6 Pittsburg, Pa October, ?72 1 25 7 Boston, Mass February, ?73 1 28 8 Philadelphia, Pa May, ?73 2 3 9 Easton, Pa October, ?73 2 7 10 New York, N Y February, ?74 211 11 St Louis, Mo May, ?74 3 3 12 Hazleton, Pa October, ?74 3 8 13 New Haven, Conn February, ?75 3 15 14 Dover, N J May, ?75 4 3 15 Cleveland, 0 October, ?75 4 9 16 Washington, D C February, ?76 4 18 17 Philadelphia, Pat June, ?76, 5 3 18 Philadelphia, Pa October, ?76 5 9 19 New York, N Y February, ?77 5 27 20 Wilkes-Barre, Pa May, ?77 6 3 21 Amenia, N Y October, ?77 6 10 22 Philadelphia, Pa. May, ?78 6 18 23 Chattanooga, Tenn May ?78 7 3 24 Lake George, N.Y. Oct. ?78 7 25 Baltimore, Md. Feb. ?79 7 26 Pittsburgh Pa, May ?79 8 27 Montreal, Canada Sept, ?79 8 28 New York, N.Y. Feb, ?80 9 29 Lake Superior, Mich Aug, ?80 9 30 Philadelphia, Pa. Feb, 81 9 31 Staunton, Va May, 81 10 32 Harrisburg, Pa Feb, 81 10

Jan 1, 1938

LIST OF THE MEETINGS OF THE INSTITUTE AND THEIR LOCALITIES FROM ITS ORGANIZATION Transactions Number Place Date Vol Page 1 Wilkes-Barre, Pa May, ?71 1 3 2 Bethlehem, Pa August, ?71 1 10 3 Troy, N Y November, ?71 1 13 4 Philadelphia, Pa February, ?72 1 17 5 New York, N Y May, ?72 1 20 6 Pittsburg, Pa October, ?72 1 25 7 Boston, Mass February, ?73 1 28 8 Philadelphia, Pa May, ?73 2 3 9 Easton, Pa October, ?73 2 7 10 New York, N Y February, ?74 211 11 St Louis, Mo May, ?74 3 3 12 Hazleton, Pa October, ?74 3 8 13 New Haven, Conn February, ?75 3 15 14 Dover, N J May, ?75 4 3 15 Cleveland, 0 October, ?75 4 9 16 Washington, D C February, ?76 4 18 17 Philadelphia, Pat June, ?76, 5 3 18 Philadelphia, Pa October, ?76 5 9 19 New York, N Y February, ?77 5 27 20 Wilkes-Barre, Pa May, ?77 6 3 21 Amenia, N Y October, ?77 6 10 22 Philadelphia, Pa. May, ?78 6 18 23 Chattanooga, Tenn May ?78 7 3 24 Lake George, N.Y. Oct. ?78 7 25 Baltimore, Md. Feb. ?79 7 26 Pittsburgh Pa, May ?79 8 27 Montreal, Canada Sept, ?79 8 28 New York, N.Y. Feb, ?80 9 29 Lake Superior, Mich Aug, ?80 9 30 Philadelphia, Pa. Feb, 81 9 31 Staunton, Va May, 81 10 32 Harrisburg, Pa Feb, 81 10

Jan 1, 1952