302 Deposits containing Flint Implements. [July, 
I have now given all the facets at present known respecting 
the relation of these beds to the glacial period, and I pro- 
ceed to the consideration of Prof. Prestwich’s theoretical 
views, as shown in the general section, Fig. 3. In the first 
place, Prof. Prestwich identifies the boulder clay seen in the 
pit on the east side of the brook as the upper boulder clay. 
As I have already mentioned it in no respedt resembles the 
clay seen in other sections above the false-bedded sands and 
gravel, and the existence of the middle glacial beds below 
this particular deposit is entirely theoretical. Prof. Prest- 
wich makes these sands and gravel to pass under the brick 
clays ; and I feel confident it will astonish many of those 
who appeal to this sedtion, as proof of the post-glacial age 
of palaeolithic man, to learn that they have never been seen 
in this position, and that their presence is an assumption 
Fig'. 9.— 1. Sandy “ trail ” with flints : 3 feet. 3. False-bedded sand and subangular 
gravel: 4 feet 6 inches. 4. “Red brick earth,” yellow and unstratified at top, 
graduating downwards into grev, laminated, calcareous clay; shells of Bithinia 
tentaculata and Limnea palustris abundant at its base, where there is about 
6 inches of sandy clay : 4 feet 6 inches. 6 '. Clay similar at top to the lower part 
of the “red brick earth,” but with more chalk grains, gradually getting more 
chalky downwards, and with stones like the upper portion of the lower boulder clay 
at point a in general section. 
only. The “ red brick earth ” ought, according to Prof. 
Prestwich’s views, to thin out eastward, and the dark clays 
or “ red brick earth ” to crop up to the surface from under- 
neath it. Instead of this, as shown in Fig. 8, at the point B 
in general section, the “ red brick earth ” follows down the 
slope of the hill, and is not underlaid at all at that point by 
the dark clays. I do not, however, attach much importance 
to this, as the “ red brick earth ” might mantle the hill, 
overlapping the edge of the dark clays, and yet Prof. Prest- 
wich’s general idea of the relation of the latter to the glacial 
beds be correct. What I do wish to point out is, that 
that relation is not proved by any of the fadts known, and 
that an entirely different interpretation is not only possible, 
