54 
therefore it would be much better and fairer to my father if he were to be 
allowed to reply in writing to the observations that have been made by 
several speakers to-night. The same observation applies, of course, to his 
opinions. 
The meeting was then adjourned. 
MR. WHITLEY’S REPLY. 
The remarks embodied in the discussion of my paper cover so wide a 
range of thought that it will be necessary for me to confine my reply to the 
one subject only to which it refers, viz. : — Are the so-called stone implements 
from the drift gravel at Broom, in the valley of the Axe, tools manufactured 
by man ? 
Mr. Rendall appears to doubt both the authenticity and the vast 
number of these tools.” I can only reply that I have personally inspected 
the whole range of these Greensand hills, from their high escarpment which 
overlooks the Vale of Taunton Dean on the north, to the English Channel 
on the south, and that I find the angular chert gravel over the whole of the 
district ; but more largely developed on the flat hill- tops, and on the spurs 
of the lower slopes of the hills bounding the valleys, every^vhere presenting 
similar angular forms to those of the gravel at Broom. And that in many 
pits over this wide range of country the supposed implements have been 
found and recognised as human tools, by Dr. John Evans, Mr. E. B. Tylor, 
Mr. Worthington Smith, Mr. D’Urban, Mr. F. Brent, and other archceo- 
logists. 
Mr. Pattison confirms my description of the section of the gravel a 
Broom, and teUs us that he has also inspected the supposed tools exhibited 
in the museum at Exeter, obtained from this gravel, of which he says : — ‘ ‘ I 
cannot conceive any one putting forth the hypothesis that these things are 
of human origin ; they are merely fractured stones, like other fractured 
stones. But this does not upset the conclusions drawn from one or two that 
have had a different origin, and unless we are prepared to give up all 
evidence or reasoning on these matters, we are bound to accept as 
genuine the implements of the Palaeolithic age which are claimed by the 
experts to be of human origin.” I accept the concession that some 
of them are merely fractured stones, and not of human origin ; but 
I cannot consent to give up the results of the labours of over twenty 
years’ examination of this subject in the field, at the bidding of a few 
archaeological experts. And if I am not a believer in Palaeolithic man, the 
stubbornness of the facts with which I have had to deal must bear the 
blame. 
My friend says it is of no use my knocking down eight skittles if one is 
left standing. Well, I admit if one piece of fractured chert should be 
