8 Canadian Record of Science. 
have been distinctly woody, while all the specimens of 
Lycopodites so far brought to my notice indicate that it was 
of a much more herbaceous character. To these differences 
we may add that the strongly recurved branchlets and the 
peculiar mode of ramification; also the pair of spore cases 
on slender, curved pedicels as found in the former,‘ are 
wholly wanting in the latter,’ giving to the two plants widely 
different aspects. 
Sir Wm. Dawson assures me that his reconstruction of 
Psilophyton was based upon laborious explorations in the 
beds where it was found. By systematic excavations 
the various parts of the plant were traced from the 
roots upward, and their connection thus established. in 
the absence of complete plants, such a method of recovery 
is well adapted to guarantee accuracy in the final results. 
I cannot but feel, therefore, that the figure of Psilophyton 
princeps*® as the type of the genus, is correct as to the 
general form and habit of growth. In such case we cannot 
fail to see that the genus is quite different from the plants 
now included under Lycopodites as represented in the figures 
already given. 
Lepidodendron nothum, Salter, is again distinct from LZ. 
gaspianum, Dn., though approaching it much nearer than 
it does to Lycopodites milleri on much the same grounds 
as already given. I have, however, not had access to a 
good type specimen of this plant, and must therefore ad- 
vance an opinion with some degree of reserve. 
LYCOPODITES REIDII, n. sp. 
Plate I. Fig. 2. 
In association with L. milleri from Caithness, there was 
obtained in Reid’s collection another lycopodiaceous plant, 
which, however, differs from any of the above genus here- 
1 Rept. Geol. Surv Can. 1871, Dev. & Up. Sil. Plants, Plate IX, figs. 102, 103; 
Jn’l. Geol. Soc. XV, 479, fig. li. 
2 Ibid XIV, Plate V, fig. 8a. 
3 Jn’l. Geol. Soc. XV. 479, li; Reports. Geol. Surv. Can. Foss. Plants of Dev. 
& Up. Sil. Pls. IX, X, XI. 
