transported
to a great distance by rivers. The same is doubtless true of the
diamond found at Manchester, Chesterfield County, Va.
Historically
the North Carolina diamonds are reported as follows : The first
specimen was picked up at the ford of Brindletown Creek, Burke County,
in 1843, by Dr. F. M. Stephenson. It was an octahedral crystal, and was
estimated to be worth $100. Another was found in the same neighborhood
by Prof. George W. Featherstonhaugh; but there seems to be no account
of its characters. The third found, but the first to attract much
attention, was obtained in 1845, from the gold-washings of D. J.
Twitty's mine, in Rutherford County. It was owned by Gen. Thomas L.
Clingman, of Asheville, and was described by Prof. Charles U. Shepard.1
It was a curved and remarkably distorted octahedron, clear, almost
flawless, and faintly tinged with yellow. The weight was about 1-1/3
carats (4.12 grains). Professor Shepard had announced the existence of
itacolumite in the gold-bearing region of North Carolina, at the
meeting of the American Association of Geologists and Naturalists in
1845, and under the impression that the itacolumite is their matrix,
had predicted the further discovery of diamonds in that region, as in
Brazil. For this reason, diamonds, when found, were naturally submitted
to him. C. Leventhorpe, of Patterson, Caldwell County, N. C., reports a
small and poor specimen found in a placer-mine on his property in
Rutherford County, and states that he presented it to Professor
Shepard, who retained it in his cabinet. The fourth important specimen
was found in gold-washings in 1852, by Dr. C. L. Hunter, near Cottage
Home, Lincoln County. It is said to have been an elongated octahedron
of a delicate greenish tint, transparent, and about half a carat in
weight. Another, said to be a very handsome white crystal of 1 carat,
was obtained in the summer of the same year, at Todd's Branch,
Mecklenburg County ; and a beautiful black stone " as large as a
chinquapin," was afterwards found by some gold-washers in the same
locality. This specimen, unfortunately, was crushed with a hammer,
sharing the fate of several American diamonds when submitted to the
mistaken test which con-
1 Am. J. Sci. II, Vol. 2, p. 253, Sept. 1846.
