52, Mr. N. F. Robarts on Stone and Bronze Celts 
neolith is not mentioned, beyond its coming under the above 
heading of ‘‘ relics of the Neolithic or later stone age,’’ upon 
which definition I do not place much reliance. Mr. Anderson 
goes on to say :—‘ In the year 1861 part of another finely formed 
stone-cutting implement was dug out of the gravel in this imme- 
diate neighbourhood ; the original is shaped out of a very hard 
white stone.” This was found by the late Mr. West when dig- 
ging for the foundation of his cottages on Bandon Hill. The 
celt is figured by Mr. Anderson, and appears to be a well- 
polished one, broken across the upper part, and therefore not 
showing its original length ; the specimen as found was 6} in. 
long, and probably was originally 7 to 74 in. in length. The 
‘‘very hard white stone’ was probably flint. Mr. Anderson 
also records Mr. Cressingham’s celt mentioned in ‘ My Garden,’ 
from which work his information appears to be derived.* 
With respect to the two celts secured by Dr. Hobson. These 
were dug up last month when connecting one of the houses in 
Beech House Road, Croydon, with the sewer in that road. The 
position was about one hundred yards from Park Lane, and the 
finder informed me that they were both lying together at a depth 
of about 6 ft. 6 in. in apparently undisturbed ground. He saw 
no signs of any interment or other remains. The trench was 
about 3 ft. 6 in. wide, and was still open when I saw it a day or 
two after the find. I could discern no signs of any disturbance on 
either side of the trench, such as there would probably have been 
had the ground been opened to that depth in such a narrow 
space. The implements were lying in a pebbly loam, the 6 ft. 
6 in. superincumbent soil being made up of 3 ft. 6 in. made soil 
and 3 ft. pebbly loam. The pebbles were tertiary ones, and 
I think the loam has washed down from higher ground and 
covered the implements, which from their condition have certainly 
not been rolled, and were probably buried very slightly, or even 
left on the surface, and the considerable thickness of black made 
soil has probably principally accumulated in the same way as 
the loam. 
No. 1, the smaller of the two celts, is quite perfect, and is 
61 in. in length and 24 in. broad in the widest part. It is made 
of a dark-coloured flint, and has an oblique edge. It has been 
considerably polished, and has apparently been used. 
No. 2 is a very fine specimen, made of a light-coloured flint, 
also in perfect condition, with an oblique cutting edge. It is 
highly polished, and the crust of the flint is almost entirely 
removed, It has to all appearances never been used. It is 
71 in. in length and 23 in. wide in the broadest part. 
Both these celts differ from those which have been figured in 
* Since the above paper was read, I learn of a broken neolithic celt found 
at Russell Hill by R. Garraway Rice, Esq., F.S.A. 
