227 
or two thousand years, as in this instance. But what if this 
cake of “stalagmite” should prove not to be stalagmite at all? 
On the page opposite to Mr. Pengelly’s unceremonious 
denials I find the following quotation from Mr. McEnery : — 
“ Mr. McEnery says in other places the drop from the roof 
acted concurrently with the oozing s from the sides in forming 
the floor, which consequently partakes of both manners.” 
May I not presume to think that a cake of calcareous lime- 
stone, attached to the wall of the cavern, was probably formed 
in the latter manner, and therefore not, in any proper sense, 
stalagmite at all ? 
If Mr. McEnery had been living, he would have been able 
to reply to Mr. Pengelly’s strictures, and to relieve me of the 
difficulty of counter statements. As it is, Mr. Pengelly freely 
bestows his blows on the dead excavator, who had “ neither 
science nor philosophy ” at his command. This refers to some 
passage about a boar spear, which for the present I must let 
stand on Mr. McEnery^s authority. Mr. Pengelly here accuses 
Mr. McEnery of writing “in a very speculative vein” “when he 
entered on his calculation,” but I must say Mr. McEnery's 
speculations seem to me much better founded than Mr. 
Pengelly^s theories. Mr. McEnery^s calculations rest on some- 
thing definite,* Mr. Pengelly relies on non-literary scientific facts . 
It was scarcely worth Mr. Pengelly J s dignity to call in 
question Mr. McEnery 's statement, that the animal remains 
during the early explorations emitted a foetid odour, seeing 
that it is notorious that the remains of mammoths in Siberia 
are reported in one instance to have “smelt abominably,” and 
in others were sufficiently fresh to have been devoured by 
dogs. As an advocate of the long chronology, he should first 
meet and dispose (if he can) of the Siberian accounts, before 
impeaching the credibility of his predecessor (see p. 638). 
He ought also to explain the consistency of the following 
“ scientific fact ” with his views : — It is reported in Nature 
(January 20, 1881) that the body of a colossal rhinoceros has 
been discovered in the Werchojanski district, Siberia. It was 
found on the bank of a small tributary to the Jana river, and 
was laid bare by the action of the water. Like the mammoth 
washed ashore by the Lena River in 1799, it is remarkably 
well preserved, the skin being unbroken and covered with 
long hair. Unfortunately only the skull of this rare fossil 
has reached St. Petersburg, and a foot is said to be at Irkutsk, 
* Transactions of the Victoria Institute , Paper on Caves of South Devon, by 
J. E. Howard, Esq.,F.B.S., vol. xiii., page 172 (p. 10 of “ People’s Edition.”) 
« 
