One of the Liverworts Griffith described may be taken as an illustration to this part of our subject on account of the interest of its re-discovery and re-description in 1910 by Goebel. This is a plant collected in Assam and named _Monosolenium tenerum_. This Marchantiaceous plant is described as having no air-chamber layer, as bearing sessile, dorsal, antheridial receptacles, and terminal, shortly stalked archegoniophores with one ventral groove in the stalk. A single archegonium--later capsule--is found in each of the half-dozen involucres. Spores and irregular bodies were found in the capsule. Recently Goebel had two tea-plants sent home from Canton. They died, but he kept the soil moist on the chance of germinating seeds. Among a number of other plants there turned up a new Liverwort. On examination this proved to be Griffith's _Monosolenium_--all types of which had been lost--a most interesting form related to the Corsiniaceae. In the Mosses and the Liverworts generally Griffith was clear on the development of the capsule or fruit following on the impregnation of an archegonium. But in _Anthoceros_, while he recognised the antheridia he was not clear as to the sunken archegonia, and regarded the capsules as arising by impregnation of unrecognisable spots on the young frond or thallus. He observed however the indication of the canal of the archegonial neck above the young capsule. Analogy with _Anthoceros_ confirmed him in his views on the reproduction of ferns. Here he spent much labour in considering the view, originally due to Hedwig, that the ramenta were male organs by the effect of which the sporangia developed. Griffith saw that if this was so, since the sporangia are initiated very early, the only time to search for the male organs was in the very young stage of the leaf. On examining such young leaves he found the terminal cells of the young ramenta very prominent and formed the working hypothesis that they were the male organs. But he stated this cautiously and was well aware how imperfect his means of observation were. The whole line of work brings vividly before us how cryptogamic the Cryptogams were at this period. Without attempting to survey Griffith's views on the various groups of Vascular Cryptogams, a word must be said of those on _Salvinia_ and _Azolla_, on which he published a long paper in addition to the other descriptions and figures in the _Notulae_. His observations bear on the development of the sorus and sporangium, but he dismissed the microsporangia as abortive or imperfectly developed structures. (I may note in passing that the study of their development led him to regard the microsporangia of _Isoetes_ in the same way.) He dwelt on the similarity of the sporangium and indusium of _Azolla_ to a gymnospermus ovule, and regarded the filaments of _Anabena_ seen penetrating within the indusium as probably the fertilising bodies in this naked-seeded cryptogam.