45 
to the localities in which they are found. If we go to New Zealand, we find 
that there they used' jade ; that in the Channel Islands they used basalt ; 
in Mexico, the natives used obsidian, 'while in other countries substances of a 
like kind, chiefly siliceous, were employed in the formation of implements. 
With respect to the specimen in my hand, this was certainly not made by 
accidental causes. It is partly manufactured, and by no ordinary process of 
brinoin® two or more things accidentally together, could it have been con- 
verted into such a hatchet as it now appears. This (showing another flint) is 
in a transition state ; this (showing another) is a piece of jade, which has 
been cut on one side and broken on the other. In the case before me I have 
some of the handiworks of that notorious individual called Flint Jack. . 
This (holding up a stone) I saw him make, and here are other illustrations. 
There is no doubt that many of the stones referred to by Dr. Carpenter have 
been manufactured, and many of the others which you may pick up by 
thousands in different places, have been produced by the knocking of one 
ao-ainst the other.. Your Lordship (the Chairman) has just returned from 
Egypt, where no doubt you found the agates on the plains actually polished 
as° if by the lapidary. Some specimens that have been brought to me by 
travellers illustrate this in a remarkable degree. The subject would, how- 
ever, be a long and tedious one to go into, especially after the matter has 
been so fully discussed on both sides, although, if there were more time, I 
should be happy to add what I could to what has already been said. 
Mr. E. Charlesworth.— I should like to say just a few words upon one 
point, with regard to the beads, which I think ought not. to be altogether 
overlooked in this discussion. Mr. Whitley held up a string of beads with 
an air of triumph, and seemed to think he had made a grand hit in catching 
the advocates of the Paleolithic implements found in the Drift in a great 
mistake. I do not wish to speak in an irreverent spirit of Mr. Whitley’s 
paper, but it struck me that what he told us was like the production of the 
play of Hamlet, with Hamlet himself omitted. He intimated that the beads 
he held up had been regarded as Paleolithic beads. Now, I would ask, who 
is there among the whole range of men of science who have written on this 
question, who has said that those beads are Paleolithic beads ? Who has 
ever said that they were the work of Paleolithic man ? 
Mr. Whitley.— Sir Charles Lyell. 
Mr. Charlesworth— I would ask where Sir C. Lyell, Sir John Lubbock, 
Prestwich, Stevens, or any man of science whose opinion carries the 
smallest weight, has so stated ? Those so-called beads are beads only to the 
common and vulgar apprehension, and everybody who has. at all studied t e 
subject knows that they are fossilized organic bodies, which m many cases 
do appear to simulate human workmanship. I again assert that no man of 
science who has ever written on the subject, has ever for a moment put those 
so-called beads forward as strengthening the theory with regard to the exist- 
ence of Palaeolithic implements. There is one suggestion I would offer, an 
that is this : like Dr. Carpenter, I am no archaeologist, my attention not having 
been given to the subject. But I went to Norwich, and in the museum of 
