^^ 



/ 1 



far as they <»o, arc rather those of the fjfenns Li/copfxh'trs tlmn 

 of Lepi(fo(leiidro)i, from which this plant differs in wanting; any 

 distinct leaf-bases, and in its short crowded loaves. Tt is to be 

 obseA'od that they apply also to Salter's LijcopoiUtvn Ml/hri, 

 and that the difference of the foliage of that species may be a 

 result merely of different state of preservation. For those reasons 

 I am disposed to place these two supposed species toirother, and 

 to retain for the species the name Li/rojxHlitcs Millcri. Tt may 

 be chaiiicterizod by the description above i^ivoii. with merely the 

 modification that the leaves are son)etimos one-third of an inch 

 lonj; and secund. 



Decorticated branches of the above species may no doubt be 

 mistaken for I*siloj)hi/fo)i, but are nevertheless (juite distinct 

 from it, and the slender branching dlchotomous stems, with 

 terminations v'hich, as Miller graphically states, are "like the 

 tendrils of a pea," are too characteristic to be easily mistaken, 

 even when neither fruit nor leaves appear. With reference to 

 fructification, the form of L. Mif/eri. renders it certain that it 

 must have borne strobiles at the ends of its branchlets, or some 

 substitute for these, and not naked spore-cases like those of 

 Psilophyton. 



The remarkable fra<;ment communicated by Sir Philip E<:;erton 

 to Mr. Carruthers,-'^ belongs to a third j^roup, and has I think 

 been quite misunderstood. I am enabled to make this statement 

 with some confidence, from the fact that the reverse or counter- 

 part of Sir Philip's specimen was in the collection of Sir Wyville 

 Thomson, and was placed by him in my hands in 187(J. Ttwas 

 noticed by me iji a paper on New Devonian Plants, in the 

 Journal of the Geologiciil Society of London in 1871, in the 

 following terms : — 



"In his recently published ' Paldontologie,' Schimper (evi- 

 dently from inattention to the descriptions and want of access 

 to specimens) doubts the Lycopodiaceous character of species 

 of Lycopodites described in my papers in the Journal of this 

 Society from the Devonian of America. Of these L. Rlchardsoni 

 and L. Matthcwi are undoubtedly very near to the modern genus 

 Lycopodium. L. Vanuxcmii is, I admit, more problematical ; 

 but Schimper could scarcely have supposed it to be a fern or a 

 fucoid allied to Caiderpa had he noticed that both in my species 

 and the allied L. pennce/ormis of Goeppert, which he does not 



•Journal of Botany, 1873. 



