sent living plants to the Horticultural Society in London, we 
cannot exclude the possibility of his Suppiyins plants of Vanda 
multiflora to Mr. Cattley in 1821 or 1822, particularly since we 
know from Lindley (Coll. Bot. sub t. 39B) that Sarcanthus 
rostratus, imported in 1821 by the Horticultural Society also 
ended up in Mr. Cattley’s garden. I was, however, not able to 
find any material in the herbaria bearing his name. On the other 
hand, Dr. Garay sent me a photograph of a nicely executed 
drawing from the collection in the British Museum made by 
Chinese artists under Reeves’s supervision. This drawing car- 
ried the usual crest of Mr. Reeves and the name “‘Golden Or- 
chid’’ in Chinese letters, as well as in faint pencil ‘‘Vanda 
multif.”’. It is reasonable to believe that this drawing was the 
basis for Lindley’s entry of Reeves in 1853, but the drawing itself 
could not have been the basis for his original description in 1826, 
since it does not show the minute details mentioned there. The 
picture gives us no clue to the origin and whereabouts of the 
type-specimen. Mrs. Hu (1972: 41) informs us that Reeves’s 
plant came from Kwangtung, but she based her opinion on the 
information given by Breitschneider. 
Since Champion collected in Hongkong between 1847 and 
1850, he could not have supplied the type-material. There is one 
problematic sheet in the Lindley Herbarium labelled Acampe 
multiflora on which is found a small piece of an inflorescence 
with two flowers flanked by loose leaves. The left leaf is at- 
tached to the paper by a small label inscribed ‘Vanda multiflora 
Hongkong 528’ and beside it is written “Major Champion’’. 
Considering the old practice of gluing specimens of different 
origin on the same herbarium sheet, the possibility cannot be 
excluded that the right leaf and perhaps the inflorescence come 
from the Cattley material. Prior to 1830, Lindley did not anno- 
tate his material carefully. Should one consider not to regard the 
plate in ‘‘Collectanea Botanica” to be the type, then the sheet in 
the Lindley Herbarium must be chosen as the lectotype, since it 
was identified and cited by Lindley. 
The next binomial chronologically is Saccolabium papillosum 
Lindl. (18: t. 1552, Jan. 1, 1833). Having decided that the Cattley 
plant was not Thalia Maravara, Lindley described it again on 
the basis of a collection by Wallich (No. 7305) from Prome in 
Burma. Under the description he included in synonymy Epiden- 
drum praemorsum Roxb. as well as Thalia Maravara. When 
54 
