The Wallace miner. [volume] (Wallace, Idaho) 1907-current, 1916-10-05
The Flotation Process--Its Invention
Introduction and Development
A. Stanley Elmore in Mining and Scientific pr

lehslon,' creased cork or what moi
'ne pith and marrow of Franl, III,
nore's basic invention has been frs
employed to render that separation
Practicable.
Precisely the same argument annie.
TO my 'acidulation' patent of 1qot- q
; was mere addition to or improye.
llent upon Frank Elmore's basic in.
Vention of 1898, it was way of on.
RANGING the selective action of oil In
mobile mixture; of increasing The
power of differentiation of the oil in
the presence of a large quantity of
water. Exactly the same thing NAV
oe saiu OF my patent of 1901 for the
use OF a creased belt for collecting
the creased mineral particles and SEN
larating them from the non-greased
rock particles. Neither of these in
Ventions could be put into practice ex-
cept IN conjunction with, or as addi-
tlon to, the fundamental process of
selectiVely greasing the mineral par
ticles.
AT this point it may be useful to
note that my creased belt patent of
1871 Is the first publication showing
an apparatus in which small quantities
or Oil must be used-it is not capable
o. practical use with large quantities
OF Oil; and while on this point | would
like, in emphasizing the date, to quote
few words from Frank Elmore's
patent-vacuum process-of 1904
After referring to processes for sep
arating ores by means of tar or oil
soap or the ike or with an alkaH, an
ACID, air, or gas, he goes on to say:
BY the present invention all such
processes are improved, more particu-
larry in the respect that smaller pro-
portion of the added substance, such
as oil or acid, may be used, by con-
Quoting them wholly or in part under
a reduced pressure. For instance. a
vacuum or partial vacuum may be
maintained in the separating vessel or
chamber
L have dealt rather fully with these
questions of degree of agitation, GUAM
tity of oil, and condition of float, and
quoted dates and references because
for some considerable time past, in
absence of definite public statements
to the contrary, increasing claims to
priority have been and are being made
without any proper justification. /
would like to record in unequivocal
terms that prior to the filing of Frank
Elmore's vacuum patent of 1904, he
and |. and those associated with us,
were fully aware of the advantages
and drawbacks connected with the use
Of more or less violent agitation and
of the effects of small and large pro-
portions of oil.
| do not wish it to be supposed that
am claiming that my CREASED belt
patent of 1901 ever came into general
use or that small proportions of oil
were common at that date, but | do
wish to be on record definitely and
emphatically that from the date of
Frank Elmore's vacuum patent aug
ust 1900 minute proportions of oil
with violent agitation were in con-
slant use producing a froth' in in
dustrial plants on a large scale.
1t may be well to set down the fact
that these vacuum plants have never
been employed with a large proportion
of OIL AS is we'll known, in such
plants the flotation of the creased
particles is secured by the at
tachment of bubbles of air or gas.
In every one of the, say, $50 units
Of vacuum plant supplied (of an ag-
gregate capacity of about 2,250,000
tons of ore per annum) the flotation of
the concentrate results from the use
Of violent agitation, minute pro-
portion Of oil, and the production of a
froth.
1t will be understood that / make
these statements in refutation of many
claims made in connection with the
patent dated April -, 1905, applied for
by Sulman, Picard and Ballot-eight
months after the date of application
of Frank Elmore's vacuum patent.
AS everything which followed the
Frank Elmore patent of 1904 seems to
me to be in the nature of ordinary
development of working details, | do
not at present purpose to follow the
technical side of the matter further,
that what l have already set
out is sufficient to enable unbiased in
to properly and fairly APP
the credit in this matter.
These notes-incomplete and abridg-
ed as they are-are already longer
than | had intended, but as there are
several points of interest that have
been misunderstood in connection with
the seemingly interminable litigation,
I venture to draw still further on the
patience Of my reader.
Toward the end of the year 1901,
Messrs. Hay, Webster and Ballot en-
tered into an agreement with the Ore
Syndicate, Limited cow
rers of the Gilmore patents) under
which those gentlemen in considera-
ton of certain payments secured an
option on the Elmore patents and all
for Australia. The OPP
ton was for six months with right to
,fss to