84 KANSAS CITY REVIEW OF SCIENCE. 
so does Christianity, but science is incompetent to convince the world of the 
truthfulness or falsity of the later as well as of the former. Seeing is not always 
believing, and the most obstinate disbelievers in experimental results are among 
the co-laborers and associates of those who bring forward alleged results for con- 
sideration. Especially is this the case among those whose prejudices run counter 
to facts sought to be established.— Boston Journal of Chemistry. 
ANTE ROPROLOGY: 
TERTIARY MAN. 
TRANSLATED FROM THE FRENCH OF ZABOROWSKI, BY E. L. BERTHOUD, A. M. 
‘¢ How far in past geological ages can we demonstrate the existence of man? 
We have to-day all necessary elements to give a satisfactory answer to this 
question. 
Already in the beginning of 1864, M. Garrigou believed that he had proofs 
of the contemporaneity of man and miocene mammifers. 
These proofs were bones of Dicrocerus Elegans, broken exactly like those 
from the quaternary caverns of France. Those bones came from the hill at 
Sansan, Department of Gers. Submitted to scientific discussion in 1868, this proof 
made no sensible impression. Nor did the so-called notches on a rhinoceros’ 
jaw observed by Col. Saussédat from miocene strata at Billy, in France, obtain 
any greater credence. 
M. Delaunay reported his discovery of incisions observed by him on the 
fossil ribs of a Haliterium obtained from the miocene cliffs of Pouance. These, 
for a long time, were attributed to the action of man. But in 1873, this posi- 
tion was abandoned by Delaunay and his follower, L’Abbe Bourgeois, and the 
incisions, on the advice and proof M. Hébert, were attributed to a shark, the 
carchorodon megalodon, that had probably once gnawed them when yet fresh. 
These fossils can to-day be seen in the museum of St. Germain. 
Generally, the only objects incontestably of the miocene epoch, which bear 
traces of marks actually formed by the intervention of human agency, are the 
chipped flints of Thénay in the Department (Loire et cher.) These have been 
gathered by M. Bourgeois at a great depth in the ground, under a more recent 
deposit that yielded polished implements of flint. All these being in a much 
more recent quaternary stratum, while under them were miocene layers con- 
taining abundant fragments of haliterium, mastodon, acerotherium, etc. 
The rough flint tools consist of scrapers, reamers, and small flint points, but 
all so roughly fashioned that everybody hesitated for a long time to take them for | 
flint chippings, designedly so chipped. 
| 
