37 
A flake may be made by accidental blows. This flake, for instance (taking 
up one) has only three fractured surfaces upon it : on this (taking up 
another) there are two or three. But here is an “ implement ” on which I 
should not, perhaps, be wrong in saying there are 150 fractures, and I ask, 
is it conceivable that 150 fractures could be made to produce such an object 
as this by any natural or accidental process ?* (Hear, hear.) It may be 
conceivable to some minds, but it is inconceivable to mine. Having been 
trained to the study of evidence, I find it, I repeat, inconceivable that this 
object could have been made except by design, and for a special purpose. 
The matter is one of common sense, and the common sense of mankind agrees 
in one conclusion. I do not base my argument on any opposition to Mr. Whit- 
ley’s conclusion, that all these small flakes have been made by natural causes ; 
but I base it on these highly-elaborated artificial implements from the Somme 
valley gravel-beds.f There is another point on which I might make a few 
observations. I find that not only in the paper of this evening, but 
likewise in other works which have appeared on the same side, it is 
imputed over and over again that scientific men have gone into this subject 
with a prejudice ; and they are charged with' a scientific cliqueism which 
prevents their accepting the truth in this matter ! Now, if I were to go 
been formed by man. If they are to be found in such enormous numbers, if 
they can be arranged in a series varying from the most imperfect to the most 
perfect forms, if they can be produced by flint-crushers, it would be necessary 
that we should possess the most certain evidence that no power of nature was 
adequate for their formation before we could arrive at the conclusion on 
principles of common sense that the fact of their human origin was proved. 
— [Rev. Preb. 0. A. Row, M.A.] 
* The first flint Dr. Carpenter took up was one which Mr. Whitley and 
Mr. Michell held to belong to the Palaeolithic age, and to be naturally 
chipped ; as to the second, no one in the room thought of disputing the fact 
that it was manufactured. The whole contention, on the part of Mr. Michell, 
Mr. Whitley, and others, was in regard to the first. — [Ed.] 
t The genuineness of some of these implements has been more than 
questioned. Mr. Keeping, a practical geologist, who went over to Abbeville, 
says he spent a week with a pickaxe searching in vain for implements ; and 
the Honorary Secretary of the Geological and Numismatic Societies wrote as 
follows to Mr. Prestwich as to the honesty of some of the workmen : — “ The 
proofs I gave in my former letter were, I think, sufficient to show that a 
regular system of imposition has been carried on by the gravel-diggers of 
Abbeville ; that the majority of implements lately obtained at Moulin 
Quignon are false. . . . But if more conclusive evidence of fraud be 
required, I am now prepared to give it.” And Mr. Evans, writing in the 
Athenceum, 6th June, 1863, said : — “ Genuine implements have been hitherto 
comparatively rare at Moulin Quignon. The suspected implements are now 
found in abundance.” The rarity of those implements which Mr. Evans 
holds to be genuine may be gathered from the following extract from Flint 
Chips, by E. T. Stevens (p. 39) : — “ In April, 1857, Mr. Prestwich and Mr. J . 
Evans inspected the Abbeville beds, under the guidance of M. Boucher de 
Perthes ; and at Amiens, Mr. Prestwich and Mr. Evans saw one of the pear- 
shaped flint implements in situ. In the same year Mr. J. W. Flowers 
found a pear-shaped implement in situ at Amiens. Shortly afterwards Mr. 
James Wyatt and Mr. T. Rupert Jones were equally fortunate.” — [Ed.] 
