H. H. Hoirorth—The Mammoth and the Glacial Drift. 257 



Cyrena occurred in thousands, and of which Mr. Prestwich gives a 

 section (Q.J.G.S. vol. xvii. p. 450), no Boulder-clay at all occurred. 

 Secondly, in another section at Paull Cliff, near Hull, where the 

 Cyrena also occurred in fewer numbers, there was an underlying 

 clay, but Prestwich. admits that inasmuch as it contained neither 

 boulders nor fossils, he could not feel certain about its being the 

 Boulder-clay " {id. 452). Mr. Prestwich then had some experi- 

 mental borings made, but they did not succeed in piercing the gravel, 

 and therefore, in his own words, "failed to obtain the exact proof" 

 {id. 453). Hence the evidence as tested by this locality utterly 

 fails. Now it is curious that while Mr. Prestwich failed to find 

 Boulder-clay in a definite position in regard to the gravels, Messrs. 

 Wood and Rome did, and they say : " The gravel of Kilscar Hill, 

 the subject of the notice of Mr. Prestwich, is (now that the ballast 

 pit has been more extensively worked) shown most distinctly to he 

 overlain by the Boulder-clay, no less than 15 feet of it being so exposed 

 in one part ; and they add that there are no means of ascertaining at 

 present on what it rests (Q.J.G.S. vol. xxiv. p. 153). 



Let us now turn to the evidence of the Mammals. This also 

 seems to be very conclusive. I will first refer to the well-known 

 memoir by Mr. C. Reid on the Geology of Holderness. In this 

 memoir, chaps, v. and vi. are headed " Inter-Glacial Beds." I do not 

 know why, for I confess I can find no evidence of their inter- 

 Glacial character. That is, however, another issue. 



Mr. Eeid objects, on the evidence of the fossils, to Professor 

 Phillips treating the Hessle gi'avels as pre-Glacial, an argument in 

 "which I do not quite follow him. He admits that at Bridlington they 

 rest directly on the Chalk {op. cit. p. 48), that is, have no Boulder-clay 

 or true Drift below them. There some Mammalian remains have 

 occurred in a buried cliff, which has since been very carefully 

 examined by Mr. Lamplugh, to whom I shall refer presently. His 

 conclusion that this bed underlies the basement bed of the Glacial 

 series is confirmed by an observation of Mr. Eeid, who says, that a 

 similar bed of chalk-gravel, in borings at Bridlington Harbour, rests 

 on the Chalk, and is cleai'ly beneath the Basement clay {id. -p. 49). 



Turning to the Hessle Mammaliferous gravels on the Humber, 

 Mr. Eeid admits that they also unmistakeably rest directly on the 

 Chalk, and are covered and overlapped by Boulder-clay. Yet he 

 goes on to argue that " we have nothing to fix the age of the Hessle 

 gravel by, and that there is no positive evidence whether another 

 underlying Boulder-clay has been denuded or not." If so, why 

 call the bed inter-Glacial ? And he goes on to say, " Prof. Phillips's 

 reference of the Hessle gravels to a pre-Glacial period may turn out, 

 with fuller evidence, to be well founded." I should have said that 

 it was conclusively provpd, there being against it no stratigraphical 

 facts, but merely an a priori prejudice based on some theory about 

 the fossils. 



A similar bed, but without fossils, at South Ferriby Cliff, on the 

 south of the Humber, also rests on the Chalk, and is overlain by 

 Bonlder-clay. 



DECADE III. — VOL. IX. NO. VI, 17 



