420 Reports and Proceedings — British Association — 
further noticed on this occasion. In dealing with the others it seems most 
simple to follow mainly the Order of chronology ; that is to say, to com- 
mence with the Cavern which first caught scientific attention, and, having 
finished all that the time at my disposal will allow me to say about it, but 
not before, to proceed to the next, in the Order thus defined ; and so on 
through the series. 
Oreston Caverns . — When Mr. Whidbey engaged to superintend the con- 
struction of the Plymouth Bi-eakwater, Sir J oseph Banks, President of the 
Royal Society, requested him to examine narrowly any caverns he might 
rneet with in the limestone-rock to be quarried at Oreston, near the mouth 
of the river Plym, not more tlian tsvo miles from the room in which we 
are assembled, and have the bones or an}- other fossil remains that were 
met with carefully preserved (see Phil. Trans. 1817, pp. 176-182). This 
request was cheerfully complied with, and Mr. Whidbey had the pleasure 
of discovering bone-caves in November 1816, November 1820, August and 
Nov. 1S22, and of sending the remains found in tbem to the Royal Society. 
It is, perhaps, worthy of remark that, though Cavern-researches received 
a great impulse from the discoveries in Kirkdale, Yorkshire, and especially 
from Dr. Buckland’s well-known and graphic descriptions of them, such 
researches had originated many years before. The request by Sir Joseph 
Banks was made at least as early as 1812 (see Trans. Devon. Assoc. v. pp. 
252, 253), and a paper on the Oreston discoveries was read to the Royal 
Society in F ebruary 1817, whereas the Kirkdale Cavern was not discovered 
until 1821. British Cave-hunting appears to have been a Science of Devon- 
shire birth. 
The Oreston Caverns soon attracted a considerable number of able 
obsei-vers ; they were visited in 1822 by Dr. Buckland and Mr. Warburton ; 
and in a comparatively short time became the theme of a somewhat volu- 
minous literature. Nothing of importance, however, seems to have been 
met with from 1822 until 1858, when another cavern, containing a large 
number of bones, was broken into. Unfortunately, there was no one'at 
band to superintend the exhumation of the specimens ; the work was left 
entirely to the common workmen, and was badly done ; mauy of the 
remains were dispersed beyond recovery ; the matrix in which they were 
buried was never adequately examined ; and we are utterly ignorant, and 
must for ever remain so, as to whether they did or did not contain indica- 
tions of human existence. I visited the spot from time to time, and bought 
up everything to be met with ; but other scientific work in another part of 
the county occupied me too closely to allow more tlian an occasional visit. 
The greater part of the specimens I secured were lodged in the British 
Museum, where they seem to have been forgotten, whilst a few remain in 
my private collection. 
Some difference of opinion has existed respecting the character of the 
successive caverns, and rnuch mystery has been imported into the question 
of the introduction of their contents. Mr. Whidbey, it is said, “ saw no 
possibility of the cavern of 1816 having bad any exterual communication 
through the rock in which it was inclosed” (Phil. Trans. 1817, pp. 176- 
182) ; but Dr. Buckland was of opinion that they were all at first fissures 
open at the top, and “ that the openings had been long filled up with 
rubbish, mud, stalactite, or fragments of roeks cemented, as sometimes 
liappens, into a breccia as solid as the original rock, and overgrown with 
grasa” (Phil. Trans. 1822, pp. 171-240). 
The conclusion I arrivecl at, after studying so much of the roof of the 
cavern of 1858 as remained intact, was that Dr. Buckland’s opinion was 
fully borne out by the facts ; that, in short, the Oreston caverns were 
Fissure Caverns , not Tunnel Caverns. 
The Cavern of 1858 was an almost vertical fissure, extending a length of 
