298 PAL-SEOLITHIC IMPLEMENTS EEOM [^^g. 1 898, 



grounds the Author denied a pre-Pleistocene age to the gravels 

 associated with these implements. With the exception of the Dewlish 

 EleijJias meridionalis, the high-level drift-deposits of the South of 

 England had yielded no remains of extinct mammalia. The highest 

 drifts, like those at Well Hill (Kent), Burgh, Headley, and Netley 

 Heaths, on the I^orth Downs, and similarly-placed deposits in 

 Hants, Dorset, etc., had yielded no implements at present ; but they 

 were found in the lower plateau-gravels about 150 to 200 feet below 

 them, as at Curly Hill on the Chobham Eidges, and Alderbury Hill 

 near Salisbury. It would thus appear that these chipped flints were 

 strewn on the surface at a period between the deposition of these 

 two series of gravel-deposits. The gravels yielding Palaeoliths in 

 abundance, such as those at Wrecklesham, Caversham, Belbins, etc., 

 were situated at still lower levels. He thought that only implements 

 found in situ in definite beds of gravel should be brought forward 

 in support of any argument dealing with their age, as those strewn on 

 a very old land-surface, such as the Kentish plateau, might gradually 

 descend in a loose soil, owing to the action of earthworms or other 

 similar agencies. 



Mr. KtruLER admitted that the scepticism which he first enter- 

 tained had given way, when he had seen a number of the plateau- 

 flints arranged in serial sequence so as to suggest evidence of 

 designed forms. At the same time, he remained uncertain with 

 regard to a large number of the so-called 'Eoliths.' While admitting 

 some and rejecting others, there was a remainder respecting which 

 he deemed it prudent to maintain an attitude of cautious reserve. 

 It would probably be argued, however, that to admit even one con- 

 cedes the whole case in favour of plateau-man. 



Mr. Steahan said that reference had been made to striated flints 

 of human workmanship from the plateau-gravels. The existence 

 of such flints would be most important, for it would tend to prove 

 not only the Glacial age of the gravels, but the pre- Glacial age of 

 the human workmanship. The specimens exhibited, however, were 

 far from supporting the suggestion. One flint alone showed cha- 

 racteristic glacial markings, but that specimen had been found lying 

 loose on the surface of the ground, and showed no trace of man's 

 handiwork. Of the others, some undoubtedly seemed to have been 

 fashioned, but none of these showed striations. He considered that 

 undoubted implements, striated beyond dispute, and collected from 

 a recognizable source, should be produced before conclusions so 

 important could be accepted. 



Mr. E. T. Newton expressed his belief that many of the plateau- 

 flints had been chipped by man. 



The Rev. E. Ashington Bullen said that he spoke with great 

 diffidence before such a body of geological experts, but would point 

 out that, with regard to stone-implements, Sir Joseph Prestwich was 

 as good a judge as any man. We must remember that his attention 

 was attracted to these rudely-worked flints in the Somme Valley 

 in 1859, that he did not rush to conclusions, but only published 

 them after 30 jrears' consideration, and ranged his great geological 



