THE EEIOCENESSICOLE (OF CALIFORNIA 633 
The presence of calcareous tufa is adverse to the theory of 
the occurrence of the bonevin the deep gravel. The tuia is an 
incrustation ; its presence indicates surface evaporation and con- 
centration of calcareous waters. It does not occur in this case 
as a permeating solution forming a cement for deep gravel, but 
as an investing crust deposited on and around the bone, although 
it is claimed that a chemical change in the bone has resulted. 
The cementing material of the deep gravels is generally siliceous 
rather than calcareous, or if calcareous it permeates the mass 
and unites the pebbles and grains of sand into a rock-like mass. 
The description states: ‘‘In cutting away the mixed tufa 
and gravel which covered the face and base, several fragments of 
human bones were removed, namely, one whole and one broken 
metatarsal; the lower end of a left fibula and fragment of an 
ulna as well as a piece of a sternum.” ‘These bones and frag- 
ments of bones might have belonged to the same individual to 
whom the skull had appertained, but besides these there was a 
portion of a human tibia of too small size to be referred to the 
same person.’ There were also fragments of the bones of a 
small mammal. Under the molar bone of the left side, a small 
snail shell was lodged, partially concealed by one of the small 
human bones which was wedged into the cavity. This shell was 
recognized by Dr. J. G. Cooper as Helix mormonum, a species 
now existing in the Sierra Nevada. Cemented to the fore part 
of the roof of the mouth was found a circular piece of shell 
four tenths of an inch in diameter, with a hole drilled through 
the center which had probably served as an ornament. Several 
very small pieces of charcoal were also found in the matter 
adhering to the base of the skull.’’? 
I have given this full quotation that there may not be any 
mistake. Professor Whitney is certainly to be commended for 
his complete presentation of evidence which is sufficient, in my 
judgment, to show that he was dealing with the relics of an 
Indian burial place rather than a fossil from the ancient gravels. 
It is not possible to conceive that this mixture of human bones 
* [bid., p. 268. 
