ORCUIDEJE. 175 



its siicciitc 1)a>:e, liliint posterior loLos, which arc more or loss rounded, its lamolloc and 

 its remarkable teriniiial lobe, exactly like a Blackcock's tail, is the same. Leavinj?, 

 however, the form and cominp; to the colour, the extremes are indeed widely ditt'erent, 

 but there are intermediate varieties. The tlowers of V. Roxhunjhii, the first discovered 

 species, are " tesselated, having- longitudinal as well as short transverse markiuss of 

 yellow and dusky ferruginous purple" (Roxb.), the lip being violet at the lobed 

 api'X, while the back ot the Hower is white. The flowers of V. Denkoniuna are 

 wholly white, except a little yellow in the very centre. V. Bemoni is dotted inside 

 with reddish-brown on a yellowish-green ground, the apex of the lip being also violet, 

 and the outside wliite. 



V. Jioxhiiri/hti, var. unicolor, is of a uniform dull greenish-brown colour on the 

 inside, lip included, without any markings, and white on the outside. Piually, my 

 fifth plant, which I too hastily took for V. Benxoni (not having at the time seen the 

 figure of this plant in the Bol. Jftu/aziiie), is coloured as follows. The inside of the 

 flower (lip excepted) is marked with longitmlinal lines ot redilish-brown, darkest 

 towards the end of the segments, with short intermediate lines of the same colour 

 running transversely, leaving square interspaces [areohc) of a light colour, so that the 

 marking may be correctli/ called " tessolated," a word inapplicable to the markings 

 in Wight's Icon. Xo. 92.5, though he describes them as such. The usual bi-lobed lip 

 is of the deepest ruby-red, with lines of the same on the lamina, the spur being 

 colourless. The hack of the flower is white, but the coloured markings on the inside 

 show faintly through. The pedicels (being in fact the germs) are also white, as in 

 F. Beiisoiii'. This I consider the handsomest of all the varieties (as I cannot but call 

 them) of this po/i/i7iro//ions plant, for jw/i/morp/iom it cannot bo called. The slight 

 differences in the length of the flower-stems, or in the indentations or erosions at the 

 end of the leaves, or in the forms of the posterior lobes of the lip, or in the number 

 of ridges, are not sutficicntly constant (even if important enough in themselves) to 

 found specific distinctions upon. I hope I may not be thought presumptuous if I 

 remark that descriptions of new species are not seldom made at home from a single 

 individual plant, which some Orchid-grower has been fortunate enough to flower 

 and bring into notice first, and that small points of structure or form are consequently 

 sometimes relied on as distinguishing marks, which those who have seen many 

 individuals in their native luiliitats know to be variable. When it happens that 

 colour is the main point of ditt'erenco, then any other little variation is eagerly looked 

 for and made the most of. This appears to hold good in the case of Orchids only, in 

 which order colour has a value accorded to it which is not accorded to it in any other 

 as far as I know. To revert shortly to our nearly-related group : I may say that 

 F. Roxhuryhii (true) is a Bengal plant, found also in Malabar, and elsewhere in the 

 Madras Presidency, but not yet found, as far as I know, in Burma. V. Ruxhuryhii, 

 var. unieolor, I have found. F. Beiiisoniana I found on Ta-ok, but I do not know 

 where Col. Benson found it. The highly-coloured variety, described above, I cannot 

 fix a locality for, and F. Beii-foiii is one of the very few Orchids described as Burmese, 

 which I have never myself gathered. 



I cannot conclude my remarks on the Vandas without pointing to another small 

 group which affords difficulties of a similar kind to those just discussed, in conse(iuencc 

 of the great resemblance in tlie forms of the flowers of its species, and the wide 

 diff"erence in their size and colour. I allude to J'liiida paniflora, V. caruk.icens and 

 F. canilea. It should be first stated that F. parnflom, Aeri'des lestaceum and Acridex 

 Wighteanum are all one and tlio same plant. Having stated this, I go on to say that 

 I find, about Mayawadd('e, East of Jlaulmain, a plant of whicli the following will 

 serve as a general description. Stem 1-2 feet long, as thick as the little finger, 

 woodv, with long stout flexuous roots just below the leaves. Loaves numerous, 

 straight, rigidly distichous, with an obli(iuely-toothed apex, G to 8 inclies long by 

 f broad, strongly keeled. Kaceme erect, many-flowered, from the axis of the lower 

 leaves. Pedicels and germ about \\ inch long, with a small lanceolate bract at its 

 base. Flowers about 1 inch across. Sepals -and petals nearly equal, but tlie latter 

 the smallest, obovate, obtuse. Lip shorter than the sepals, with two thick longitudinal 

 lidges on the middle lobe, which has a dilated extremity with a bilobed convexity. 



