lower clay surface wherever the animal placed 

 its feet. 



Therefore, in so far as the diagram is con- 

 cerned, these facts should be; as they can be, 

 fairly and properly indicated by different depths 

 of shading, etc. 



Secondly, in the diagram of the mammoth 

 footprints and other tracks at the southeast 

 angle of excavation there are two matters that 

 need rectification as misleading. First, the 

 legend, "Impression of the Body of an Animal." 

 Now, as a matter of fact, this is only a report 

 that has been handed down in the history of 

 the earlier excavations, for the floor is removed 

 and nothing whatever is left to indicate this 

 problematical "impression." 



Thirdly, near the same place on the dia- 

 gram are five round, full tracks described with 

 others, in the text as " several confused tracks 

 of a man and some large animal." This 

 "large animal," referring to what made the 

 round tracks; but these apparently different 

 tracks were all made by the same animal, the 

 so-called man. When this animal came to this 

 part of the mud deposit it found itself in soft 

 mud, into which the feet sank about four 

 inches, apparently to hard, coarse sandstone 

 beneath, and it possibly made a turn to avoid 

 being bogged. One of these round tracks has 

 had the center core of coarse sandstone removed 

 by Mr. Bell, and the result is a display of one 

 of the long footprints, and the others are cer- 

 tainly footprints of the same animal, produced 

 at the same time, but these prints are yet all 

 filled up. Whether this filling is from the 

 supposed deposit of coarse sand, as in the one 

 cleaned out, or whether from " balling" of the 

 foot, remains to be proven. I have written to 

 Mr. Bell, asking him to make an examination of 

 the matter. 



And here it may be suggested that in this 

 very locality we might reasonably expect to 

 find more important footprints and possible re- 

 mains, especially if the animal became bogged 

 in this soft mud. 



The So-called Man is a Quadruped. 



The question of the quadrupedal character of 

 the footprints of the so-called man having been 

 raised by high authority, it was a matter of in- 

 terest to ascertain if there was any indication 

 of duplication of footprints; that is, whether 

 the hind foot was placed unsymmetrically over 

 the back of the forefoot. I have already stated 

 that in series No. 1 there are no two tracks 

 which are exactly alike, and that in the line of 

 the wolf's tracks one of the imprints of the foot 

 of the so-called man is apparently duplicated. 

 Other indications of duplication are to be found 

 in the different series on the lower floor, and in 



more than one instance a secondary side im- 

 press on one side only of the animal is as clearly 

 indicated as the impress itself. So marked was 

 this in one instance that a plaster cast had been 

 taken of the two, and I examined the original 

 to find the smaller secondary clearly made out 

 but the larger and inside track mostly obliter- 

 ated by the wheels of carts carrying stone from 

 the quarry. 



In this light the evidence seems to me unan- 

 swerable that the so-called man was a quadru- 

 ped, and it will require the wiping out of these 

 duplications before they can be assigned to a 

 biped. 



The question of the assumed sandal of wood 

 or of rawhide, was clearly solved in my mind 

 as soon as I made out the existence of the two 

 layers of mud of different stiffness and tenacity, 

 already detailed with some minuteness in the 

 description of the footprints of the series No. 1. 

 Moreover, in the newly exposed footprints of 

 the same animal, where the impress is made 

 several inches deep in the softer soil, there is 

 no indication whatever of a sandal. Nor in 

 many footprints which I examined on the 

 lower floor is there any such suggestive margin. 

 With the palpable evidences before me, I can 

 see no other logical deduction that that the 

 animal was a quadruped; whether a megatheroid 

 or a bear I leave for the paleontologists to de- 

 cide. It is the solution of a mechanical 

 problem by actual graphical demonstration. 



Fragmentary Character of Tusks, 

 Teeth and Bones. 



A word more of the character of the deposits 

 after the mud layers of the upper and lower 

 floors had been 'covered by them. 



The first 10 feet is composed of very sharp, 

 small grains of sand from disintegrated quartz 

 and other materials. It has been deposited by 

 swiftly moving waters as indicated by the 

 markings of the numerous deposits lying at 

 many angles, and having been partially cut 

 away and redeposited many times. 



In this stratum are found the jaw bones here- 

 tofore described by Mr. Gibbes, pieces of ele- 

 phant tusks, fragments of bone and of teeth, 

 the tooth of an alephant, of which I furnish a 

 drawing; and the matrices made by pine cones, 

 and pieces of wood. All these fossil remains 

 are fragmentary and scattered, indicating that 

 they have been water-borne by the strongly 

 rushing waters which brought down the sands, 

 and that the source from whence they came was 

 up the stream at a higher level. 



[A series of diagrams to scale was used by 

 Professor Davidson for reference as he proceeded 

 with his report.] 



