158 THE JOURNAL OF GEOLOGY.. 



There is no doubt that this specimen suggests, perhaps more 

 decidedly than any other American so-called gravel implement 

 thus far collected, a resemblance to one of the well-known Euro- 

 pean types of implements. This is noted by Professor Wright, 

 and may be regarded by many as a point worthy of attention. 

 We must, however, look with extreme caution upon deductions 

 drawn from or depending upon analogies of form. Close analo- 

 gies of form between Indian rejects and some varieties of Euro- 

 pean paleolithic objects are too common to permit the attachment 

 of much value to this feature of this or any other similar find. 

 The remark of Professor Wright quoted above, that "the simi- 

 larity of pattern is too minute to have originated except from 

 imitation," is rather a novel statement, since no specimen of its 

 type has been reported from the American gravels, and the New- 

 comerstown man could hardly have been familiar with European 

 forms. The only available models would appear to be the Indian 

 rejects of the valley of the Tuscarawas. * 



As to the surface polish, that is a common feature of the 

 Ohio flints, and I have before me during this writing a tray of 

 quarry rejects that have the same glazed effect. This is a 

 characteristic of the stone, and has no bearing upon questions of 

 age or use or culture, and must be considered as without signifi- 

 cance in these connections. 



Professor Wright is entirely satisfied with the results of his 

 efforts to corroborate the statements of the collector. He has 

 examined and reexamined Mr. Mills, receiving every assurance 

 of the verity of the find, but after all he really secures no addi- 

 tional assurance and can receive no fully satisfactory assurance 

 that Mr. Mills was not in error. Professor Wright has visited 

 and photographed the site and will speedily prepare a plate for 

 publication,^ for just what purpose, however, it is rather hard to 

 see, since the nature of the gravels is not disputed, and a volume 

 of photographs will not give additional weight to the proofs. A 

 photograph made of the tree after the bird has flown will not 

 help in determining the bird. No more will observations on Mr. 



'Wright, G. F., Science, February 3, 1893. 



