TO SOUTH-AFRICAN BOTANY. 479 
gracili unifloro (an semper ?); foliis lineari-lanceolatis; vaginis 
scariosis rufo-maculatis caulem vestientibus; galea erecta sub- 
infundibulari, apice acuta, basi obtusa vix saccata ; sepalis late- 
ralibus ovatis acuminatis; petalis linearibus resupinatis, apice 
erecto-inflexis dilatatis ; labello laneeolato ; rostello erecto bifido. 
Semipedalis, tota glabra. Tubera obovata oblongave, 1 em. 
longa. Folia 2-3, herbacea 5-7 cm. longa, 0°5 cm. lata, acuta, 
in petiolum angustata, lete viridia; vagin: duo vel tres, bractea 
conformis. Flos pallide ceruleus leviter striatus. Gales os 
15 em. longum, 1 em. latum. Sepala lateralia 1:7 em. longa, 
0'6 em. lata. Labellum 1:4 em. longum, 0'4 em. latum.  Petalis 
minimis sub galea absconditis, parte dilatata lutea brunneo striata. 
Columna carnea. Authera resupinata. Ovarium tenue 1°5 em. 
longum. Stigma suborbiculatum trilobatum atro-purpureum, 
(v. v.)—Schizodium maculatum, Zindl.! Gen. et Sp. Orch, 
p. 360. 
Hab. In rimis saxorum montis Muizenberg, prope antrum 
magnum, alt. circa 1600 ped., flor. Nov. Herb. meo No. 4843! 
This pretty little species is very distinct from any other. Yet 
why Lindley should have placed it under Schizodium, to which it 
has no possible resemblance, I cannot conceive. It seems to be 
rare in herbaria, and I have found no examples in Pappe's collec- 
tions. Its discovery on the Cape peninsula is due to Mr. Bodkin; 
and I found it subsequently in some abundance in a deep ravine 
on the Muizenberg, in very similar stations (though at a lower 
zone of altitude) to that in which D. longicornis, Linn. f., is 
found. 
§ VEXILLATA. 
Disa vENosa*, Swartz. D.caule erecto; foliis oblongo-obovatis; 
spica laxe pauciflora; sepalo altero erecto rhomboideo-oblongo 
saccato, lateralibus oblongis; petalis erectis oblongis; labello 
lanceolato; columna erecta subporrecta. 
* [Although there is no specimeu named Disa venosa in Thunberg’s herbarium 
yet the specimens on one of his sheets named Disa excelsa so well agree with 
his description of D. vencsa (whilst they will not in any way agree with his de- 
: scription of D. excelsa, and are not at all like his other specimens so named), 
that they appear to me to be the identical specimens from which he made his 
description of D. venosa. The plant Lindley understood as D. venosa is very 
distinct from Thunberg's plant, and will not agree with his description. The 
plant in Thunberg’s herbarium which I take to be D. venosa is identical with 
that here described by Mr. Bolus.—N. E. Bnowx.] 
