Vol. 59.] OSSIFEROUS CAVERN AT DOVEHOLES. 131 



at the finding of a Pliocene cave, as that one had never before been 

 discovered. From the evidence given by the Author, there was no 

 room for doubting that these specimens had been obtained from 

 the fissure, or pothole, although their mineral condition was so 

 remarkably like that of the teeth found in the East Anglian Crags. 

 The gnawed bones and preponderance of young animals made it 

 highly probable that these remains were originally deposited in a 

 ■* hyaena-den ' in Pliocene times ; but it seemed also probable that 

 they had been subsequently disturbed and redeposited, perhaps 

 much more recently. 



Although he preferred to regard the ' Forest-Bed ' of Norfolk as 

 the latest phase of the Pliocene, he did not think the question of 

 its classification with the Pliocene or with the Pleistocene of primary 

 importance ; for all geologists were agreed as to its intermediate 

 position. 



Mr. Clement Reid congratulated the Author, and concurred with 

 him as to the Pliocene age of the remains from Doveholes. They 

 suggested a period probably of the date of the Norwich or Red 

 Crag. The general question of the classification of the Pliocene and 

 Pleistocene deposits, brought up by the Author, did not seem to arise 

 from this discovery, for no one would refer the mammalia exhibited 

 to the period of the Forest-Bed. He thought that several zones 

 were represented in our Pleistocene. Whether the Cromer Forest- 

 Bed should be classed as Pliocene or Pleistocene was a question of 

 convenience, and of the balance of evidence yielded by its entire 

 fauna and flora. If the Forest-Bed were transferred to the 

 Pleistocene, the difficulties would not be overcome, but made worse ; 

 for its marine mollusca were almost identical with those of the 

 Norwich Crag, while the rest of its fauna and flora seemed more to 

 ally it with the strata below than with those above. 



Dr. C. W. Andrews said that, with regard to the determination 

 of the mammalia, he entirely agreed with the Author. The asso- 

 ciation of Mastodon with the other remains was of extreme interest, 

 and the Pliocene age of the deposit was undoubted. 



Dr. A. Smith Woodward said that the paper was an illustration 

 of the importance of local observers, and laid stress on the admirable 

 work done by Mr. Salt, of Buxton, who was the centre of all scientific 

 information in the neighbourhood. There could be no possible 

 hesitation as to the authenticity of the discovery. He had examined 

 the specimens, and agreed that many showed marks of hyaena-teeth. 

 The youthfulness of the Mastodon-teeth supported the Author's con- 

 tention as to the cave-origin of the fauna. For various reasons, he 

 held that the specimen of Elephas meridionalis was probably correctly 

 determined. 



The Author said that, with regard to a previous speaker's remark 

 that he (the Author) had ' mixed up ' the fauna of the Forest-Bed 

 with that of the Lower Brickearth of the Thames Valley, it was 

 only necessary to refer to the paper in question in the Quarterly 

 Journal, in which the one is defined as the early and pre-Glacial, 

 and the other as the Middle and probably Glacial. With regard to 



