166 G. Slater — Human Skeleton in Glacial Deposits. 



commencement of the Boulder-clay, and I am in hopes that further 

 excavation may throw more light on this strange occurrence." 



Dr. John E. Marr, who visited the site after the skeleton was 

 removed, reported that the clay resembled decalcified Boulder- clay, 

 and had patches of unaltered clay here and there. It was very thin, 

 and he hesitated to pronounce any definite opinion. He did not know 

 how one would distinguish between Boulder-clay in situ and clay 

 which had been derived from Boulder-clay at a somewhat higher 

 level, which had flowed as the result of being waterlogged. Such 

 flows were often seen on beaches below Boulder-clay clift's, and they 

 strongly resembled true Boulder-clay. He did not, however, suggest 

 that the clay above the skeleton had that origin, but that personally 

 he was unable to distinguish a tliin mass of such a clay from true 

 Boulder-clay. In the course of a further letter on the subject 

 Dr. Marr said that he could see no difference between the decalcified 

 Boulder-clay in the higher pit above the normal undecalcified Boulder- 

 clay, and the decalcified clay above the skeleton. The slopes in the 

 vicinity were very slight, but they might have been diminished by 

 erosion, and it was possible that the clay might have been moved 

 from another place. 



According to the report in the Times the skull was filled with 

 Boulder-clay. During the lecture Professor Keith referred to this 

 point. With regard to the skull having becomed filled, Professor 

 Keith remarked, that the material, which was the same as the stratum 

 in ivhich the skull lay, could only have been carried in by three 

 agencies — water, roots, and worms — and he thought the last two 

 might be excluded. They were driven to suppose that, when the 

 skull came to rest, there existed a more moist or fluid condition of the 

 stratum. 



It will be seen from these reports that neither Mr. Whitaker nor 

 Dr. Marr can be looked upon as ver}' decided supporters of Mr. Moir's 

 view. The very important point raised by Dr. Marr as to the effect 

 of the slopes on erosion is crucial to the present matter. Both 

 :\Ir. A. D. Hall, M.A., F.ll.S., and Dr. llussell have shown in their 

 investigations on S(jils that even a sedentary soil is never at rest, and 

 that rain-wash is an important factor in soils even when the slo])es 

 are slight. In the present case the site of the discovery is on the side 

 of a valley. The plateau to the east reaches a height of about 

 160 feet, half a mile to the east of the section ; this gives a gradient 

 of roughly fifty feet in half a mile. Between the plateau to the east 

 and i^orwich Boad on the west, a distance of one mile, there is a drop 

 of 100 feet or more. It is quite reasonable to conclude that the upper 

 part at least of the clay in the section is the result of slow accumulations 

 of rain -wash. 



The calcareous band referred to in the sands beneath the clay is in 

 the nature of a 'cemented pan', the rainfall being only sufficient to 

 remove the calcareous matter from the clay down to a depth of three 

 or four feet. Certainly such a bed is no sign of antiquity as such 

 ' pans ' are known to form quite rapidly. It is obvious that everything 

 depends upon the evidence of those who saw the bones in situ. 



Mr. Moir was informed of the discovery and his account of the 



