498 PROCEEDINGS OF THE GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY. [June 3, 



to, all the soiling came off readily, and left the flint as fresh as though 

 it were the work of yesterday. In sharpness of angles and in form, 

 it also differed widely from all previously discovered at Moulin 

 Quignon. We concluded that these two specimens were forgeries, 

 and to that opinion I still adhere. On our return to M. Boucher de 

 Perthes, we took the opportunity to express our doubts as to the 

 authenticity of the Flint Implements he had recently obtained from 

 Moulin Quignon, and to suggest how serious a doubt this would cast 

 upon the jaw itself. We asked him to wash some of the specimens, 

 and one that he did so wash only confirmed our opinion. At the same 

 time we should have reserved the general expression of this opinion 

 until there had been an opportunity for further inquiry, and study of 

 the section. Our obj ect was merely to caution M. de Perthes. Circum- 

 stances led to our being called upon to endorse that opinion before we 

 had had the opportunity of the further examination we could have 

 wished ; nevertheless what we afterwards saw of other Flint Imple- 

 ments recently brought from the same place strengthened our first 

 impression. In all these recently found specimens there is an entire 

 absence of all the characters by which we had hitherto distinguished 

 genuine from false specimens. It is true that both at Menchecourt 

 and St. Acheul we had met with Flint Implements sharp and not 

 worn, some not stained, and some rude in form, but, on all, some one 

 character of antiquity was to be found : on one traces of incrustation 

 of carbonate of lime ; on another, of dendrites ; on a third, of 

 discolouring ; and on a fourth, lustre. So also we could find here and 

 there a flint, sharp, fresh, and not coloured. But all these were 

 exceptional characters, whereas in the case of the new Moulin- 

 Quignon specimens these exceptions become the rule. That one or 

 even two specimens might be found exhibiting these exceptional 

 characters might, it seemed, have been possible ; but when we found 

 that all, without exception, exhibited these characters, the impro- 

 bability of such an occurrence became so great as to cause us to be- 

 lieve that some imposition had been practised. There were, it is true, 

 two or three specimens about which I felt more doubt ; but, on the 

 whole, the unfavourable evidence outweighed other considerations. 



The intrinsic evidence on the two points was therefore in accord- 

 ance, and equally unfavourable to the authenticity of the case. The 

 objections raised to this conclusion by the French naturalists, who 

 had taken up the subject, led to a friendly meeting in Paris *. 

 Mr. Evans was unable to attend this meeting ; it will therefore 

 be understood that I no longer refer to his opinion in conjunction 

 with my own. The inquiry lasted three days, when, unable to agree 

 in a conclusion, we adjourned for further inquiry to Abbeville. The 

 discussion was careful and temperate. Each point was fully gone 

 into at the Paris sittings. Our French allies) not having had, pro- 



* The members of the meeting were : — M. Milne -Edwards, president ; M. de 

 Quatrefages, M. Desnoyers, M. Delesse, M. Lartet, Dr. Falconer, Mr. Busk, Dr. 

 Carpenter (in Paris only), and the author. For full particulars of the inquiry 

 see the careful account of the " Proces Verbaux," published by Dr. Falconer and 

 others, in the 'Natural History Keview' for August 1863. 



