336 
of 57,600 years was arrived at, during which the bones had lain in 
their grave, and during which vast lapse of time the cranium had 
been enabled to resist the process of decay. The calculation itself, 
moreover, was transparently inaccurate. And although this article had 
been put into the hands of thousands of school children, with the authority 
of one of H.M.’s Inspectors, yet I was unable to persuade them to withdraw 
or even correct the gross mis-statement, and the sole result has been that I 
received a challenge from Mr. Bradlaugh to meet him in discussion anywhere. 
Let all take a leaf from Professor Hughes’s book, and hazard no definite calcu- 
lation ; but let us wait patiently for more data, resting quite sure, as again 
and again we have been taught, that the records of the Book of Nature will 
never contradict the assertions of the Book of Grace, — 
“ Bead each aright, and each will read the same.” 
Eev. H. G. Tomkins. — Since the Nile has been mentioned in connection 
with calculations as to the lapse of ages and the antiquity of man, I may 
be allowed to remark that the deductions of Mr. L. Horner from his observa- 
tions in the Delta have been set aside by more recent inquirers, — “ The whole 
inquiry,” says Dr. Birch, “ is for many reasons more than unsatisfactory.’’ — 
Wilkinson, And. Egyptians, New Edition, 1878, vol. i., p. 9, footnote. 
Mr. W. Topley, F.G.S. (a visitor). — I should like to say with regard to the 
Brandon flints, that Professor Hughes probably may not be aware of the fact 
that some memoranda have been sent in to the Boyal Society on the subject, 
and are now in the hands of the Secretary, and I hope will be gone into. A 
large number of people disbelieved the evidence that was adduced ; and 
although I do not argue the point, I must say that I thought the evidence 
insufficient. But all the officers of the Geological Survey who have seen the 
place, say they have not the slightest doubt but that the implements found in 
the brick earth have been undoubtedly overlaid by a boulder glacial deposit. 
I do not think Professor Hughes was so clear when he passed onwards a little 
period. I should like to know his opinion as to the actual antiquity of man. 
It may be useful to take the historic age as a multiple but what multiple is 
it ? Of course, the whole of his argument is called in question upon the 
authenticity of these flint implements ; but, according to his showing, the 
Somme and the Thames have for the last 2,000 years been in pretty much the 
same state as they are now. Assuming it is only 2,000 years ago since the 
change began, what multiple is that with regard to the period to -which we 
are to go back to find the age of these implements ? I should like Professor 
Hughes to state whether, according to his view of the evidence, although it 
has been called in question, he, in common with a great many geologists, 
would stretch the chronology of man to its utmost limits ? He might tell us 
of the wonderful succession of events that have taken place in Kent’s Cavern, 
where, below the hyaena beds and flint implements, there is a great gap, and 
then still earlier deposits and flint implements, and along with these a totally 
different fauna, the hysena and the elephant being altogether absent, and the 
remains are almost exclusively bears ; so that one can hardly but believe that 
