Show simple item record

Correspondence from O. C. Charlton to George P. Merrill, December 13, 1899Show simple item record

dc.creatorCharlton, O. C.
dc.date.accessioned2024-02-12T18:09:39Z
dc.date.available2024-02-12T18:09:39Z
dc.date.issued1899-12-13
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.tcu.edu/handle/116099117/63041
dc.descriptionHandwritten letter from O. C. Charlton with Baylor University in correspondence with George P. Merrill from the U. S. National Museum regarding the Fayette County, Texas meteorite and Mart stone.
dc.relationOscar Monnig Papers (MS 124)
dc.rightsPrior written permission from TCU Special Collections required to use any document or photograph.
dc.sourceSeries III, Box 06, Fayette Co., Texas correspondence folder
dc.subjectMeteorite
dc.subjectFayette County meteorite
dc.subjectFayette County (Tex.)
dc.subjectSmithsonian Institution
dc.subjectMart meteorite
dc.subjectCharlton, O. C.
dc.subjectMerrill, George P.
dc.titleCorrespondence from O. C. Charlton to George P. Merrill, December 13, 1899
dc.typeDocument
dc.description.transcriptionAns. Dec. 13 9- Baylor University 531 South Fifth St Waco, Texas Dec. 8, 1899 Mr. Geo. S. Merrill Dept. of Ecology, U. S. National Museum Dear Sir: Yours of Oct 17 should have been delivered long ago. It was soon followed by the meteorite and a letter from the department enclosing a receipt which latter I misplaced, may it not do however for you to sign for its receipt by me which signature I hereby authorize you to make? I shame be glad indeed to receive proof from the negative you had prepared. I send you under reparable cover two photographs take by one of our photographers here. In adjusting the instrument to a different light on the cut iron one of the pictures is larger than the other. The ruler shown is 9 inches long. I shall deem it a favor to have you with me the meaning of the polished holder around the part showing crystallization. Is it a part not touch by the and is it a layer oxidized somewhat by exposure after falling? Or is it a layer which was fused while it fell? Or is it yet something else? Please reply to me soon on this point. I mailed in Science that you place the original weight as 19 3/4 lbs. are you not mistaken in this. On the day Mr. Vaughan shipped it to you we had it weighed on fine new scales as a grocery and the grocer apparent took great care and state the weight as 15 lbs. 9 3/4 oz. The part returned weighs 14 lb 3 oz. And it does not look like you had cut much more than a pound from it. How much does your piece weigh? I can determine this about correctly by specific gravity methods if the can’t me will hear immersion in water without injury to the dark coating. Can it be immersed without injury I do not mean to trouble you at this time for any recipe but will ask you what kind of material have you used in working the cart. Is it me preparation not easily broken or is it plaster of pan’s simply? I shall be pleased to learn the result of your analysis when it is completed. If you see Mr. Schubert soon kingly remember me to him. I met him in Wyoming. One thing more. What was the volume of the great meteorite secured in Greenland and what its weight when received at your institution? Is it iron? I wish to prepare a statement for our newspapers soon regarding this “Mart Iron” and should very much like to hear from you at your earliest convenience. Yours O. C. Charlton


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
Fayette_Co_Texas_Correspondenc ...
Size:
72.75Mb
Format:
PDF

View/Open

This item appears in the following Collection(s)
  • Records of the Monnig Meteorite Gallery [2825]
    The files are arranged alphabetically, usually according to the location of discovery of the meteorite. The files contain correspondence and research material on the meteorites in the collection.

Show simple item record

© TCU Library 2015 | Contact Special Collections |