50 NOTES ON BRITISH ORCHIDS. [JIay 



and which, I believe, he said were originally given him by Miss 

 Hope. On several occasions I have fonnd plants in the bogs of 

 Carnarvonshire, that I consider equally as good as the variety just 

 referred to ; indeed, on growing the two plants side by side, I, as 

 well as many others, found it impossible to detect a difference. 



The habit and general appearance, as well as situations in which 

 this plant is found growing, go far in establishing what I have on 

 various occasions pointed out, viz. that this variety is far more closely 

 allied to the marsh orchis {0. latifolia) than to its namesake 0. 

 maculata. That it is a sport or hybrid between these two plants is 

 admitted by all — on the one hand, closely resembling 0. maculata 

 in flowers and makings of the leaf, and 0. latifolia in habit, general 

 appearance, and situations in which it is found growing. 



With me Miss Hope's plant never exceeded 12 inches in height, 

 the flower-spike alone being from 4 to 5 inches, very dense, and 

 perfectly cylindrical. 



0. latifolia (the marsh orchis). — Tubers irregularly and imperfectly palmate, 

 resembling to some extent those of 0. maculata, though usually smaller and not 

 so much divided. Stem from 9 to 12 or more inches in height, with usually erect 

 leaves of a bright green which diminish in size from the base upwards. Bracts, 

 especially the lower ones, much longer than the flowers. Spur thick, conical, and 

 shorter than the ovary. Lip tliree-lobed, and deflexed at the sides. 



This is a very handsome and rather variable plant, and, espe- 

 cially as regards identity and classification, has been the subject 

 of more comment than any other native species. By some 

 botanists this plant is considered but a variety of 0. maculata, 

 but that the typical species of each are quite distinct I have long 

 ago been convinced, although at the same time it must be admitted 

 that intermediate forms linking the two plants together do exist, 

 and of which 0. maculata supci^ba, one of the handsomest, may be 

 cited as an example. The true marsh orchid (described as 0. 

 incarnata by the older botanists) can, however, never be mistaken 

 for 0. maculata, as no tw^o native species are more dissimilar, either 

 in size, habit, general appearance, or colour of flowers. The leaves 

 of the marsh orchid are never spotted like those of 0. maculata, 

 but of a bright pleasant green, always erect, and clasping the stem. 

 There is also this marked difference between the two, that whereas 

 0. latifolia, when coming into flower, appears bristly, from the bracts 

 being longer than the flowers, 0. maculata is perfectly smooth, the 

 bract and germs being of equal length. The flowers are also cylin- 

 drical, and of a flesh or port-wine colour, whereas in 0. maculata 

 they are conical and pale-purple or lilac. In 0. maculata, the lower 

 leaf or leaves are rounded at the tips, and shorter than those farther 

 up the stem ; but in 0. latifolia the reverse of this is the case, the 



