Page:Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London, vol. 35.djvu/196

146 niacus of Asia Minor. I feel inclined to view them as two well-marked varieties rather than as two distinct species.

Dr. stated that teeth from Ohio in the Royal College of Surgeons and in Paris were certainly those of the Mammoth, although Prof. Marsh has asserted that the Mammoth has not been found south of the Columbia river and east of the Rocky Mountains. He thought it possible that Elephas Columbi, E. armeniacus, and E. indicus might be the same species, but that E. primigenius was distinctly different. The Mammoth was more nearly allied to the Asiatic than any other elephant. He gave instances of thick- and thin-plated teeth occurring in the same district in Britain; in none did we, however, get crowns like the teeth of the Indian elephant. Hence he did not think there was evidence at present for running all these species together.

Mr. commented on some popular representations of the Mammoth; and asked if Prof. Dawkins thought the elephant's teeth in the Norwich Crag were those of E. primigenius.

Prof. asked whether the evidence for the discovery of the tooth of E. primigenius under the Lower Boulder-clay was satisfactory, instancing mistakes that had been made in the case of Cervus megaceros, which had been asserted, though on defective evidence, to occur in the peat-bogs, whereas it appeared that really it was in the underlying shell-marl.

Mr. said that a Committee had been appointed at the last Meeting of the British Association at Dublin to investigate the occurrence of the Cervus megaceros in Ireland. He would have been glad if Prof. Boyd Dawkins had also attempted to trace the pedigree of the Mammoth upwards as well as downwards. He could not accept Mr. Howorth's view of a cataclysmic cause for the destruction of the Siberian Mammoth and the preservation of its remains.

Prof. stated that Dr. Falconer considered Elephas primigenius very closely allied to E. indicus; in fact he always examined the mineral character of the specimen, as the speaker had seen when he went over a large collection made by Prof. Sedgwick, and contained in the Woodwardian Museum.

Dr. asked as to the nature of the Boulder-clay and whether the blocks contained in it were angular or rounded. He inquired whether the evidence was sufficiently satisfactory that it belonged to the Lower Boulder-clay, and was not simply derived from it in subsequent changes.

Prof. said that he doubted the glacial origin of any of the series of deposits described by Prof. Boyd Dawkins, and stated that the Boulder-clays of Cheshire only belonged to the later part of the Glacial epoch. They were marine and resorted. He thought the same of the Hertfordshire drift.

Dr. said that he had recently been along the Norfolk