976 The American Naturalist. [December, 
PINEY BRANCH (D. C.) QUARRY WORKSHOP AND ITS 
IMPLEMENTS: 
By THomas WI1son.? 
(Continued from page 885.) 
LEE 
Mr. Holmes’ paper comprises 26 printed pages. The first 
part is occupied with a description and statement of facts; the 
second part is as I have shown made up of theory, assumption, 
opinion. I have examined them sufficiently to show their 
want of value. But the climax is reserved to the closing por- 
tion, for, commencing on page 19 and continuing 8 pages is a 
chapter relating to the age of the workshop and the race of 
the men who worked it. Mr. Holmes’ conclusion is that though 
the quarry is prehistoric the age is not great and the race was 
the Modern Indian. This he argues with profundity, going 
into the racial question in detail and with great elaboration. 
I decline to argue these propositions. I am appalled at the 
temerity as well as the dogmatism with which he decides these 
abstruse questions. He is a gentleman for whom I have the 
highest regard. I have known him well and favorably for 
many years. He has studied and written upon art products 
and art evolution and their relation with prehistoric man, 
in a philosophical and artistic strain which has done credit 
to his logic, and been as much benefit to art as to archeol- 
ogy. But Sir John Lubbock, Sir John Evans, Prof. Tylor, 
Sophus Müller, Hildebrand, Montellius, Naidallac, Hamy, 
de Mortillet and Cartailhac and the host of eminent Europeans, 
archeologists and anthropologists, of whom Keane is the latest 
author, who have spent their lives in the study of this science, 
‘Read before the Anthropological Society, Tuesday Evening, December 4; 
1894. 
BOR of Prehistoric Anthropology, U.S. National Museum, Washington, 
EO. 
