rOEETGN INTELLIGEls^CE. 
221 
those prpviously extracted. Lastly, at the top of the 'black bed,' -where 
the maxillary bone reposed, a sand was found exactly like that noted in 
the alveolus. 
"After these evidences, the English savanis declared themselves con- 
vinced that the jaw had not been introduced fraudulently in the bed of 
diluvium, and that it was contemporary with the material which formed 
that bed. 
" As to the question as to what is the age of that deposit, that remains 
to be resolved. 
" Thus has terminated this interesting debate." 
Since Dr. Falconer's return to England, he has communicated the fol- 
lowing letter to the ' Times ' of the 2ist ult., and which we give at length, 
as the appendix he has thought fit to make to the unanimous conclusions 
of the congress must open afresh the question of the age of the ]\Ioulin- 
Quignon deposits : — 
" Sir. — In my letter which appeared in your issue of the 25th ult., I 
stated that the case of the Moulin-Quignon human jaw presented in its 
then stage, as a whole, ' one of the most subtle instances of perplexed evi- 
dence on a point of science that has come under my experience.' It has 
since undergone an investigation at Paris and Abbeville by a joint com- 
mission of French and English men of science, throughout which it main- 
tained the same perplexed and contradictory character, not to be sur- 
passed, in some respects at least, by any cause celehre on record. But I 
am happy to say that upon one point, wliich it was of the last importance 
to clear up, the commission, French and English, were unanimous, — namely, 
that the discovery of the remarkable human relic in f<itu. in the gravel-pit 
of Moulin-Quignon, was authentic, and that no imposition had been prac- 
tised by the workmen in the case. As an inference to the contrary on the 
part of myself and my scientific friends was distinctly expressed in my 
former letter, I am desirous that there should not be the slightest reserve 
in withdrawing it. "What now remains to be established is the precise age 
of the relic. This part of the case is still involved in obscurity, and so be- 
set with contradictory and apparently incompatible evidence, that its satis- 
factory solution is at the present moment of the utmost difficulty. 
" The voluminous proces-verhaux of the commission will appear in due 
course. Here I shall merely give a brief summary of the proceedings, 
prefacing it with a short resume of the events which led to the con- 
ference. 
" On the 14th, 15th, and 16th of April, I was at Abbeville, where, on the 
14th, I met Dr. Carpenter, and on the loth M. Quatrefiiges. I communi- 
cated to both my then impression, subject to the reserve of a more detailed 
study of the materials, that the jaw was an authentic fossil, and on the 
15th I wrote to tlie same effect to my friend M. Lartet, to whom the jaw 
was consigned in Paris. On the 16th Dr. Carpenter gave a short paper to 
the Royal Society, supporting in guarded terms the authenticity of the 
discovery ; and on the 20th of April M. de Qiiatrefages communicated to 
the ' Institut ' a memoir by M. Boucher de Perthes, followed by descrip- 
tive remarks by himself, conveying the high authority of his opinion in 
favour of the jaw being a true fossil of geological antiquity. On Saturday, 
the 18th, immediately after my return to London, I commenced the scru- 
tiny detailed in my former letter, and on the 21st, in conjunction with, or 
aided by, Mr. John Evans, Mr. Prestwich, Mr. Busk, and Mr. Tomes, I 
arrived at the results which are there stated. That day, without the de- 
lay of a post, I communicated my suspicions to M. Lartet, requesting 
him to make them, and the grounds upon which they were founded, 
