GLACIAL MAN IN THE TRENTON GRAVELS. 35 



observations, the collections and the books ? Do I speak too 

 positively in condemnation of the results of years of earnest 

 investigation ? Perhaps so, but the voluminous testimony is so 

 overloaded with inaccuracies, the relics of unscientific method 

 and misleading hypotheses, that every item inust be sharply 

 questioned ; and the conclusions reached so far overstep the 

 limits warranted by the evidence, that heroic measures alone can 

 be effectual in determining their exact value. If, as many 

 believe, vital errors have been embodied in the evidence pre- 

 sented by the advocates of the theory, it is impossible to state 

 the case too strongly. Error once fully absorbed into the litera- 

 ture of science has many advantages over the tardy truth ; it is 

 strongly fortified and must be attacked and exposed without fear 

 or favor. Truth involved with it cannot permanently suffer. 

 If the twin theories of a gravel and a paleolithic man in eastern 

 America are to be assailed as unsound or as not properly sup- 

 ported, it should be done now while the originators and uphold- 

 ers are alive and alert to sustain their positions or to yield to the 

 advances of truth. I do not wish to wrongly characterize or to 

 unduly minimize the evidence brought to bear in favor of these 

 theories. I do intend, however, to assist the world so far as 

 possible in securing an exact estimate of all that has been said 

 and done, and all that is to be done. 



In a previous article I have examined the evidence relating 

 to paleolithic art in the eastern United States, and have indicated 

 its utter inadequacy and unreliability. In this paper the testi- 

 mony relating to the occurrence of gravel art, in the locality 

 most fully relied upon by advocates of the theory, has been 

 partially reviewed and subjected to the strong light of recent 

 observations. It is found that the whole fabric, so imposing 

 in books and museums, shrinks away surprisingly as it is 

 approached. The evidence furnished by the bluff face and by 

 the railway cutting, the two leading sites, is fatally weakened by 

 the practical demonstration of the fact that the gravels proper 

 are at these points barren of art remains. In endeavoring to 

 naturalize an immigrant hypothesis, our gravel searchers, unac- 



