225 
Mr. Pengelly* s attention (on my last or third visit) was chiefly 
directed towards his more appreciative companions ; though 
he was so far from neglecting me that he records the distance 
at which my eyes were situated from the inscription* he was 
showing us as 7 feet ; near enough, it would seem, for any pur- 
pose of information that could be gained from this particular 
case ; for the whole profession of explanation resulted in our 
being elaborately shown an incision which Mr. Pengelly now 
tells us is of no importance whatever (p. 602) , whilst the 
really important inscriptions are withheld from view ! The 
importance of these inscriptions may be judged from the fol- 
lowing quotation from p. 3 of my Paper. f So difficult is it to 
ascertain what are scientific facts, and what are those which, 
on the other hand, possess only an illusory character. 
The result was that I was entirely led astray, and when I 
came to read up the literature of the cavern I supposed that 
what had been shown me was an inscription in the crypt of 
dates”; and consequently confounded that recess with th e“Cave 
of Inscriptions,” which is in a distant part of the cavern. This 
error was pointed out by Mr. Pengelly, and corrected before 
my paper was read. 
Mr. Pengelly thinks that I made both too little and too 
much of my opportunities of personal investigation of the 
cave, which “ when with [him] me could not have exceeded 
(on my last visit) half an hour ” (p. 596). I certainly should 
have given a different estimate of the time ; but it shows, at all 
events, that Mr. Pengelly, when particularly invited to show 
the cave, does not take too much pains to unveil its secrets. 
This matters little ; but I cannot say the same of his apparent 
insinuation that I (not mistook, but) made a gratuitously 
false assertion of my having first visited the place in 1869, 
under his guidance. He says that he has no recollection of 
it, and that my name does not occur in his journal, which may 
very well be ; but it happens that I have a very distinct 
recollection of the circumstance, and that, moreover, I have an 
entry in my pocket-book for the year, which would be valid 
proof, in any court of justice, that I visited Kent Cavern on 
the 31st of August, 1869. 
On my second visit (with the guide) I was stirred up to take 
* Robert Hedges, of Ireland, February 20, 1 688. 
f “ Taking the correct data (that of the Report of 1869) we have twelve 
feet of stalagmite formed, let it be assumed , from the dates on its upper 
surface, at the rate of '05 inch in 250 years, and thereby arrive at the con- 
clusion that the accumulation of the whole required 720,000 years.” (!) 
