{381 ) 
mojl as big as a Man's Fiji. They an all Cheek-Teeth or 
Grinders ; the Earth in which the") lay being like a Sea Earthy 
or Fulling Earth with not a Stone in it. 
’Tis obfervable how this Account in many of it’sCircum- 
fiances^ agrees with thac of Mr Nevilin his Letter to your 
Grace ; as that the Teeth were all Grinders, Four in num- 
ber, found with other large broken Bones near a Brook, and. 
in a Claiey Earth, without a Stone .* but then the weight 
and Magnitude of our largeft Teeth, fo far furpafs thofe 
that were found in England, that thefe did not come up to 
a fifth Part of thofe, which fliows they could not be 
the Teeth of the fame Animal, 1 muft confefs the 
Author does not fo much as fufpe<ft they were Elephant's 
Teeth, but on the contra y is of opinion that they belong’d 
to another Species, the Hippopotamus or River-Horje, a 
Bead that’s yet a greater Stranger in thefe Parts gf the 
World, than the Elephant it felf ; and therefore it’s Paffage 
hither can never be accounted for, but by fome fuch like 
Suppofition as we have made. 
However Mr. John Luffkins in his Letter, wherein he 
defigns to have reference to that Difcourfe ; and which is 
inferred in the Philofophical Tranf act ions for Sept. 1701. 
No- 274. differs in his Judgments from Mr.. Somners about 
thefe Teeth, which he thinks muft have been Elephant's 
Teeth ; as he is pofitive thofe large Bones he defcribes in 
the fame Letter, and found near Harwich in Ejfex, certain- 
ly muft have been, 
Not having feen, much lefs examined, any of the 
Bones or Teeth concern’d in this Controverfy ; either thofe 
that were found in Kent , or thofe in Ejfex ; I cannot well 
take upon me to determine any thing in this matter; tho’ 
thofe dug up at Chartham, as I underftand, may ftill be 
perufed by the Curious among the Natural Rarities of 
the Royal Society in their Repofitory at London. But this 
at prefent I can fafely fay, thac if the Figures of the Teeth 
given 
* 
