SPIBANTHES GEMMIPABA. 169 



cumstances to which it seems useful to advert are — 1, that the 

 adhesion of the sepals and petals is no greater than occurs in 

 S. autumnalis ; 2, that the sepaline hairs represented in Mr. Sow- 

 erby's figure are scarcely discoverable in the dried specimen ; 3, 

 that the face of the column is distinctly pilose below the stigma, as 

 Mr. Sowerby has shown it ; 4, that the lip has two distinct, rather 

 large, oblong calli within the base, which were overlooked by both 

 Mr. Babington and Mr. Sowerby. Other material points are, that 

 the foot of the column is unusually long, whence the breadth of 

 the base of the sepals and apex of the ovary is much greater than 

 usual, that the base of the lip is nearly twice as broad as the apex 

 above the contraction, and that the coherent sepals and petals 

 curve their points upwards in such a manner as to become secund, 

 while the point of the lip projects beyond them in front. 



The first suggestion that is on record as to the relation of this 

 plant is that of Smith, who compares it with Sp. autumnalis (his 

 Neottia spiralis) , from which he separates it. The second is my own, 

 that it may be identical with Sp. Romanzoffiana. The third is that 

 of Mr. Babington, who refers it unhesitatingly to the Sp. cernua 

 of the United States, an old and well-known species. 



Mr. Babington objects to its union with Sp. Romanzoffiana, 

 because it differs by "its much shorter bracts, its blunt linear 

 and equally broad sepals, and its longer spatulate lip." But if 

 Eeichenbach's figures are examined (and he evidently possessed 

 excellent materials), especially the left-hand figure of his t. 125, 

 and all the analysis, it will be seen that these distinctions are 

 unreal, with the exception of the short bracts. Better differences 

 are to be found in the hairy sepals of Sp. Romanzoffiana, and if I 

 mistake not, in the smaller calli placed far within the base of the 

 lip of that species. 



From the proposal to identify the plant with Spiranthes cernua, 

 I am obliged wholly to dissent. The dispersion of terrestrial 

 Orchids is doubtless far greater than is generally supposed, and, 

 therefore, mere geographical probabilities cannot have much 

 weight ; at the same time we must require very strong proof that 

 a plant hitherto unknown, except in the south-east of Ireland, is 

 the same as a common North American species. Not only does it 

 seem to me that such proof is absent, but I hope to show that the 

 evidence lies all the other way. Sp. cernua has long naked stems 

 and a thin spike loaded with glandular hairs — Sp. gemmipara has 

 short leafy stems and a dense naked spike. Sp. cernua has the 

 ovary very narrow and much contracted below the sepals, as is 



