246 
If the doctrine of the antiquity of man is to rest on these implements, I do 
not think the evidence is sufficient. You may observe in this natural stone 
that there is an approach to a tang, and if you were left to choose which of 
the two was the artificial stone, you might be inclined to choose the natural 
one. (Applause.) 
Mr. L. T. Dibdin. — I am afraid that Mr. Callard has demoralised us 
upon the subject of flint implements. There is one point mentioned on 
the last page but one of the paper which I wish had been enlarged 
upon, and that is where, in speaking about the difference between 
man and the lower animals, and showing that, whereas man makes tools 
animals do not, the author has drawn attention to the very important point, 
that not only do animalsmot make tools of their own accord, but there is no 
evidence of monkeys ever having imitated man in making even the rudest 
implements. I regard this point as one of importance, because we all know 
that monkeys are very imitative animals, and even admitting fundamental 
distinction between the instinct of animals and reason, we might still have 
expected that if they could not imitate the manufacture of tools, they could, 
at any rate, with man’s example before them, imitate the making of those 
tools. 
Mr. R. W. Dibdin. — In the second page of the paper it is stated, — 
“ Yet, in all these cases, the implement itself, apart from its accessories, is 
an argument for the presence of man.” If that is so, surely it shows the 
extreme importance of the line of study which several of our members, and 
more especially Mr. Callard, have taken in sifting the evidence as to whether 
the stones found are really implements that have been made by man, or 
whether they are not accidentally fractured, or forgeries, or are the product of 
modern times, and not of the extreme antiquity of which some of their advo- 
cates and possible inventors claim for them. I think we cannot be suffi- 
ciently grateful to those of our members who have so thoroughly searched 
into this subject, and prevented our being carried away by what at first 
may seem very plausible arguments in favour of the antiquity of certain 
flint implements, and necessarily also for the extreme antiquity of man. 
The meeting was then adjourned. 
