Page:Geological Evidences of the Antiquity of Man.djvu/115

Rh influence on the subsequent progress of opinion in France, I shall interrupt my account of the researches made in the Valley of the Somme, by a brief notice of those which were carried on in 1858 in Devonshire with more than usual care and scientific method. Dr. Buckland, in his celebrated work, entitled 'Reliquiæ Diluvianæ,' published in 1823, in which he treated of the organic remains contained in caves, fissures, and 'diluvial gravel' in England, had given a clear statement of the results of his own original observations, and had declared that none of the human bones or stone implements met with by him in any of the caverns could be considered to be as old as the mammoth and other extinct quadrupeds. Opinions in harmony with this conclusion continued until very lately to be generally in vogue in England; although about the time that Schmerling was exploring the Liége caves, the Rev. Mr. M'Enery, a Roman Catholic priest, residing near Torquay, had found in a cave one mile east of that town, called 'Kent's Hole,' in red loam covered with stalagmite, not only bones of the mammoth, tichorhine rhinoceros, cave-bear, and other mammalia, but several remarkable flint tools, some of which he supposed to be of great antiquity, while there were also remains of man in the same cave of a later date.

About ten years afterwards, in a 'Memoir on the Geology of South Devon,' published in 1842 by the Geological Society of London, an able geologist, Mr. Godwin-Austen, declared that he had obtained in the same cave (Kent's Hole)