The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1880-01-14
ANOTHER UNS UCCESSFUL
SHOT

ma some instructive reading in this weeks ed-
torial Independent
No, we did not overlook it. We thought
OF saying something about it. But as we
feared our readers might weary of these
erudite discussions, we let it pass.
Beng called on, we now publish the
item referred to by the Independent. 1t
is the following:
IS; B. T. SSkertchly, at the last meeting of
the British Association, as reported in Ma
ture OF September 18th, stated evidences of the
existence of man in East Anglia during the
glacial period. Human implements occur in
the beds underlying the chalky bowlder clay,
equivalents of the middle glacial series of S. Y.
Wood Jr, and F. w. Harmer, near Mildenhall
Warren Hill, Clifford in Suffolk, West Stow in
Suffolk, and Brandon. Near Brandon the same
beds have been dug into beneath the bowlder
clay, with the same results. These proved the
existence of man in those districts previous to
the glacial periods. w. Boyd Dawkins, in the
ensuing discussion said the glacial period should
not be looked upon as dividing line in CLASH
hcation. The same animals lived in Europe be-
fore and after this period, which could not be
hard and fast line. Upon applying this con
sheraton to the question of the antiquity of
man, there was no priOri reason for suppos-
ing that man was not here in the pre- glacial
age. Seeing that animals We're living in Europe
before the cold period arrived at its maximum.
1t was probable that man was here too Man
was living in The south of this country when
the area north of the Thames was submerged-
when the sea there was bearing cebergs which
were accommodating the bowlder CLAW Sir John
Lubbock felt considerable difficulty in resisting
the conclusions drawn by Mr. Skertchlv. Prof
Huxley could not see the slightest reason for
supposing that pre-glacial man was in any re-
NOS ,r1oc 81 Il
dence Mr. Skertchly had brought forward was
very satisfactory. At later meeting of the
Cambridge Philosophical Society, o. Fisher gave
an account of two visits to the localities de-
scribed by Mr.. Skertchly. At first he was not
convinced but on making a more thorough
examination, as at Mildenhall and Bury st.
Edmunds, he found Mr. Skertchlys views con-
firmed That gentleman was present at the
meeting, and showed worked flint taken by
his own hands from the loan underlying the
chalky bowlder clay Hence the conclusions of
the Association paper were confirmed by Fisher,
an independent observer, and at first doubter,
OF Skertchlys statement"
Now in reply to the above we quote
the following from the recent paper of
Prof Hughes, of Cambridge University,
before the Victoria Institute in London
After disposing of some other cases, he
came to this in East Anglia, and said
More recently the legitimate ambition to be
hrst to make a great discovery, not controlled
and kept subordinated to Judgment, have ad-
duced other examples, where the age of man has
been too hastily referred to glacial or inter
glacial times. Whatever may be found hereaf
ter, the evidence on which this case has now
been based was not such as would Justify the
statements founded on it. Widespread beds of
loan and sand, and gravel cover the lower
levels OF East Anglia, and probably ranging
over a vast period have been collectively des
cribed as middle glacial for below are glacial
beds, and In the middle series boulder clay. and
over them, whether IN part RENAME not
another boulder clay. Lying Ill hollows and
on the TANKS of valleys, cut through this ancient
loan and other beds, are river terraces of later
date and these because in great part made up
OF the older beds, are like them and require ex-
perlence to distinguish. In these old terrace
deposits implements of mans undoubted work
have long been found but recently it has been
said that some of these beds belongs to the older
series. This then, becomes a matter of opinion
For my part, being well acquainted with the
deposits IN question, and having listened to the
evidence, give my testimony quite against the
glacial or the intergacial age of any of the beds
from which the hatchets came It is, however
said that other evidence has since been found
conclusive as to this. I can but criticise that
which has been adduced but l will saw that if
such has been found and been so long withheld,
while there are many deeply interested, and
so many who would like to verify at once and on
the ground the statements made then do hold
that there has not been shown that love of full
investigation which is the soul of science"
On the same occasion Prof Dawkins
reviewed the evidence for the existence
of tertiary and inter-glacial man, and
concurred with Prof. Hughes. He said
" l entirely concur with Prof. Hughes in
the view which he takes relating to the
antiquity of man, and the necessity Of
looking narrowly into facts bearing on
the question All the alleged cases of
the existence Of man before the Paleoli-
THE age, on the continent seem to me on
a careful enquiry, to be unsatisfactory. ="
He then passes them in review, and con-
cludes as follows As the evidence
stands at present there is no proof on the
continent or in this country, of man hav-
ing lived in this part Of the world before
the middle stage Of the Pleistocene age,
when most Of the living animals were
then alive
There is no inconsistency between the
remarks Of Prof Dawkins quoted by the
IyldeDe71denL and this declaration He 10