DRAKE — HUMAN EEMAINS WITH EXTINCT ANIMALS. 247 
Mephistoplieles sits down between the solemn antique sphinxes and 
boldly questions them, and reads their riddles, even so must we 
boldly question the bones, &c., that constantly turn up, and as boldly 
read their riddles ; and so vague images and gorgeous dreams, that 
float about like the tremulous sunbeam on the wave, dazzling yet 
undefined, shall give place to " things of beauty," and so become " a 
joy for ever." But I have almost lost sight of what I intended to 
relate. En sinking a pit for gravel, through mould, clay and sand, a 
human skull was found by Mr, Chowler, of corn-law protection 
notoriety, twelve feet below the surface, with bones of Bos, Elephas, 
Equus, &c. The strata evidently never had been disturbed, but were 
just as originally deposited. 
Those who fond of archseology will likewise find in their ramble 
through the Yale ample gratification : near Bennington is a British 
encampment, with a circular moat or vallum round, and partly filled 
with water. I dug out some British pottery, and found some stone 
foundations formed with Drift from the Oolite, and crammed with 
fossils : near is also a mound, which I hope to see opened at a future 
trip. Opposite on the " back bone" of Lincolnshire are extensive 
remains of another British camp. 
There is no doubt but that the valley of the Trent is exceedingly 
rich in Drift fossils ; and I firmly believe the delta of the Soar, near 
Kegworth, where that river made its embouchoure into the Trent, 
would well repay a little work. Cannot some of your readers buckle 
on the harness and set to work ? — Yours, &c., Francis Drake, 
Leicester. 
[This communication from our correspondent Mr. Drake, reached 
us barely in time for press. We hope to give minute details of this 
important discovery of human-remains in our next number. — 
Ed. Geol.] 
CORRESPOlSrDElSrCE. 
THE DARWINIAN THEORY. 
Sir, — I read with some regret the article in your number for April, on the 
" Darwinian Theory :" not that I would be understood to be in any way opposed 
to the ventOation and free discussion of any subject fairly within the range of 
scientific research ; on the contrary, I believe there is no surer method of testing 
the numerous theories, which now-a-days so often take the place of facts, than to 
submit them to the free and open discussion of those who are conversant with the 
facts which they profess to generahze and explain. Still, when all this allowance 
has been made, I confess that I do feel ^ome little regret at seeing the modernized 
Lamarckian Theory of Darwin advocated in the pages of your valuable magazine ; 
for I cannot forget that this " development" theory would not only not furnish us 
with an adequate solution of the facts it professes to generalize, since by the direct 
admission of its advocates, an admission, by the way, which forms one of their 
