222 
THE GEOLOGIST. 
known to M. cle Qiiatrefages. But the latter had already given in his 
affirmative memoir to the 'Institut' the previous day (20th), followed on 
the 27th ult. and 4th inst. by successive notes in the same sense. On the 
25th of April, my letter, written before I M as aware of M. de Quatrefages' 
first communication, appeared in your columns. Men of science in France 
and England were thus suddenly placed at direct issue on a grave and im- 
portant point, which excited lively general interest on both sides of the 
Channel. But, happily, from the frankness and rapidity of the communi- 
cations interchanged, there existed the most cordial relations, and the con- 
viction of loyalty and good faith on both sides. The French savants, the 
more they went into the case, were the more convinced of the soundness 
of their conclusions, while their English opponents, the more they weighed 
the evidence before them, were the more strengthened in their doubts. A 
wordy discussion on paper would have wasted time, and it must have been 
protracted. On the 15th inst. I received an invitation from M. Lartet to 
proceed to Paris with my colleagues, and Dr. Carpenter got one from M. 
de Quatrefages to the same etTect, — the parties named were Messrs. 
Prestwich, John ]wans. Carpenter, and Falconer, — to discuss and investi- 
gate the question, along with M. de Quatrefages, member of the Institut ; 
M. Lartet, member of the Greological Society of France, and foreign 
member of the Geological Society of London ; M. Delesse, Professor of 
Geology to the Ecole JS^orniale, Paris; and M. Pesnoyers, member of the 
Institut. Dr. Carpenter and myself at once detenaiined to accept the 
invitation, and Mr. Busk agreed to accompany us. Unfortunately, Mr. 
Evans, the strength of our array on the characters of ancient fiiut-im- 
plements, could not go, and Mr. Prestwich was unable to join us until 
the second day of the conference. The English deputation reached Paris 
on the 9th inst., and immediately proceeded to business. The commis- 
sion was formed, consisting of the parties above named, aided by the 
following French savants, who took a share in the proceedings throughout, 
viz. M. I'Abbe Bourgeois, M. Gaudry, and M. Alphonse Milne-Edwards. 
At the request of the English, M. Milne-Edwards, member of the Institut, 
and the eminent zoologist, courteously agreed to preside over the com- 
mission. The following particulars are given from notes and recollec- 
tion, we not having yet received a copy of the proces-verhaux. 
" The first two meetings, one of which lasted nearly six hours, were de- 
voted to the characters which distinguish genuine flint-implements of an- 
tiquity from modern imitations. The English deputies presented about 
twenty flint liaches from the gravel-pit of Moulin -Quignon, and the ma- 
jority of them found within the last three months, the whole of which 
they insisted bore the characters of comparatively modern manufacture, so 
great was their freshness and sharpness, while they were wanting in the 
patina, superficial incrustations, dendrites, and rolled edges, one or more 
of which, as a general rule, stamp the majority of genuine specimens. The 
French members of the commission submitted nearly an equal number of 
a similar cast from Moulin-Quignon, the majority of which also the En- 
glish regarded as unauthentic. A few specimens from Moulin-Quignon, 
but of earlier discovery, were presented and admitted as genuine on both 
sides. 
" The ' detached molar ' which had previously been sawn up by me, and 
upon which so much weight was rested by the English observers, was at 
once abandoned, by the consent of both sides, from the circumstance that 
it was open to question on the score of identification, or of certainty as to 
its origin. This in the sequel proved to be immaterial. 
" The characters presented by the jaw itself were then examined. The 
