530 PRIMITIVE INDUSTRY. 



the Uuiversity of Pennsylvania. Dr. Abbott, like M. Boucher de Per- 

 thes, was subjected to much investigation and had to stand under the 

 light of iier(!e criticism from the opponents of his theory. Di'. Abbott's 

 character or ability as an arclucologist, a naturalist, or an observer, is 

 not at issue at the present moment. No person can now deny the fact 

 that lie believes that he has found a number of these implements deeply 

 iubedded in the original gravel deposit of the Delaware River at Tren- 

 ton; the implements found at Trenton and otherwheres in the United 

 States have the same general appearance of those heretofore shown 

 from other parts of the Avorld. In addition to my own testimony on 

 this subject, I may add the testimony of M. Boule, a noted French ge- 

 ologist and student of prehistoric man, on the same subject, which has 

 a|)peared in the last number of Anthropologies vol. iv, pp. 3G, 37 : 



"During my voyage in the United States in 1801, on the occasion of 

 the International Congress of Geology, at Washington, I was able to 

 see some of the cliii)ped stones of Trenton, in the collection of pre- 

 historic arclnieology at the Smithsonian Institution, and in the Peabody 

 .Museum. I could there study at leisure the collections of Dr. Abbott. 

 That which struck me most forcibly was the similitude, I may say 

 almost identity, of the form of the American instruments with the 

 European palaeolithic implement. At Trenton, as at Amiens, Paris, 

 in the collections of Dr. Abbott as of those of .M. d'.Vcy, there is, along 

 with a certain nund)er of chips and unformed pieces, also a number of 

 finished i)ieces showing careful work, and which could not be 'rejects' 

 of fabrication. The most carei'ul and most competent archa'ologist of 

 our country will ])e unable to distinguish otherwise than by the nature 

 of the material the difference between the instrnments of Trenton 

 (as well as of other ])arts of the United States) from tlie pre-historic 

 implements (»f Europe. There is, in this fact, an argument in favor of 

 tlie antiquity of these specimens AAliich will impress ])re-historic arch- 

 aeologists of experience." 



The fact that other gentlemen entitled to ecpuil credit for accuracy as 

 observers have sought at Trenton for these implements in 1893 and 

 failed to find any, is no evidence that Dr. Abbott may not have found 

 them there from 1S7<» to 1890. The gravel at Trenton speads over and 

 fills up a saucer-like depression about three miles in diameter, and from 

 35 to 12 feet in dei)th in the center. That these gentlemen should have 

 vsought with all care and closeness these gravels in the great sewer 

 which has been lately laid through the city of Trenton near the river, 

 and have found none of these implements, is no evidence that Dr. Ab- 

 bott may not have found them among the acres of gravels 10 to 30 or 

 more feet in thickness that have been dug out a mile away from the 

 aforesaid sewer by the Pennsyhania Ilailroad, during a i»eriod of ten 

 or fifteen years past, to obtain gravel for its road ballast. 



Illustrative of my proposition, I may cite the depot of Chelles, near 

 Paris, wliere thousands of these implements have been found. It is an 

 immense gravel bank, much the sanu^ as at Trenton, 20 or 30 feet thick, 

 extending over an area of a huiulred or more acres in the valley of the 

 river Marne. It is located on a railroad, »ud was used as was the 



