The Scottish specimens conform to these characters in so far as they are known, but not having as yet afforded fruit or internal structure, they cannot be specifically determined with certainty. More complete specimens should be carefully searched for, and will no doubt be found. In Belgium, M. Crepin has described a new species from the Upper Devonian of Condroz under the name _P. Condrusianum_ (1875). It wants, however, some of the more important characters of the genus, and differs in having a pinnate ramification, giving it the aspect of a fern. In a later paper (1876) the author considers this species distinct from _Psilophyton_, and proposes for it a new generic name _Rhacophyton_. The characters given by Mr. Carruthers, in his paper of 1873, for the species _P. Dechenianum_, are very few and general: "Lower branches short and frequently branching, giving the plant an oblong circumscription." Yet even these characters do not apply, so far as known, to Miller's fucoids or Salter's rootlets or Goeppert's _Haliserites_. They merely express the peculiar mode of branching already referred to in Salter's _Lepidodendron nothum_. The identification of the former plants with the _Lepidodendron_ and _Lycopodites_, indeed, rests only on mere juxtaposition of fragments, and on the slight resemblance of the decorticated ends of the branches of the latter plants to _Psilophyton_. It is contradicted by the obtuse ends of the branches of the _Lepidodendron_ and _Lycopodites_, and by the apparently strobilaceous termination of some of them. Salter's description of his _Lepidodendron nothum_ is quite definite, and accords with specimens placed in my hands by Mr. Peach: "Stems half an inch broad, tapering little, branches short; set on at an acute angle, blunt at their terminations. Leaves in seven to ten rows, very short, not a line long, and rather spreading than closely imbricate." These characters, however, in so far as they go, are rather those of the genus _Lycopodites_ than of _Lepidodendron_, from which this plant differs in wanting any distinct leaf-bases, and in its short, crowded leaves. It is to be observed that they apply also to Salter's _Lycopodites Milleri_, and that the difference of the foliage of that species may be a result merely of different state of preservation. For these reasons I am disposed to place these two supposed species together, and to retain for the species the name _Lycopodites Milleri_. It may be characterised by the description above given, with merely the modification that the leaves are sometimes nearly one-third of an inch long and secund (Fig. 17, _supra_, lower figure).