the smaller moccasin-flower. Both species were fragrant 
in a slight degree, Cypripedium parviflorum being, of 
course, the more fragrant of the two.” 
In 1905, House (Bull. Torr. Bot. Club 32: 374) was 
inclined to follow Rydberg’s conclusions entirely. He 
said that an examination of fresh specimens during a 
period of two years led him to believe that there were 
three species of yellow lady’s slipper. He recognized 
C.pubescens as a distinct and definite species. However, 
he admitted that C.parviflorum . . differs from C.pu¬ 
bescens, apparently in size only, and is usually found in 
more swampy situations than C.pubescens. Conservative 
treatment may reduce this to a variety of pubescens .” 
House also accepted de Candolle’s C. flavescens , saying 
that it is “.. . a species of shady ravines and moist rich 
woodlands, of decidedly more boreal distribution than 
the last [ C.parviflorum ], which seems to follow quite 
closely the range of C.pubescens Willd. In addition to 
the laterally flattened (the greatest expansion being ver¬ 
tical) lip, the lip is often subglobose and conspicuously 
ascending, and the leaves narrower and more ascending, 
than in the yellow-flowered species of our flora.” After 
having written in 1918 (Wild Flowers of New York,p. 
66): “Since numerous intermediate forms occur it is 
probable that they [C.parviflorum and C.pubescens ] rep¬ 
resent forms of a single species”, House, in 1924 (Annot. 
List of the Ferns and Flowering PI. of N. Y. State, p- 
235) admitted each of them to specific rank, and at the 
same time said: “I am now inclined to regard it [C.fla¬ 
vescens] as an intermediate form or possibly a hybrid be¬ 
tween C.parviflorum and C.pubescens .” Herein, House 
simply exemplifies the confused state of mind or indeci¬ 
sion of most botanists in regard to these plants. 
A most interesting observation is recorded on a sheet 
in the Ames Herbarium by A. B. Klugh, at the time 
[ 6 ] 
