220 NATIVE BRITISH ORCHIDACE^ 



It was first observed in a withered state by Mr St Quintin of Scampston Hall, 

 Malton, Yorks., on July 4th, 1928, who transferred two plants to his greenhouse, 

 where I saw it in flower in 1930. On June 6th, 1929, he found 11 plants in flower, 

 often with immature plants forming a tuft with them. I saw twelve flowering 

 plants in situ m June, 1930, and a few on the Durham coast some days later, all re- 

 stricted to a very limited area and nearly over. At first I thought they might be 

 Orchis incarnata x maailata, but they diiiered considerably from a spike of that hybrid 

 from the same valley (PL H, fig. i), and showed no definite signs of 0. maculata; also 

 they exliibited none of the variation usual among hybrids. As the flowers and ring- 

 spotted leaves recalled those of 0. latijolia, the plant suggested O. latijolia yTit.ptmila 

 Freyn, which also has a dwarf habit and narrow spotted leaves, but neither the de- 

 scription nor the time of flowering given by Ascherson and Graebner" supported 

 this view, and it seemed very unlikely that a plant of high altitudes should occur 

 but little above sea-level in Britain. In 193 1 I specially noted a pan of six dwarf non- 

 flowering plants with long and very narrow ring-spotted leaves. In 1932 I was 

 astonished to find that these dwarf plants had attained an average height of 30 cm. 

 (one was 36 cm. tall), with much broader (27 mm.) leaves, and spikes ± 10 cm. long! 

 The Mystery Orchis, as Mr St Quintin called it, had revealed what it could have 

 been but for the adverse conditions under which it grew. I could no longer doubt 

 that it was a stunted form of O. latijolia and therefore named it var. eboretisis. It 

 certainly is not 0. incarnata, maculata, pratermissa ot purpurella. As shown above it 

 does not appear to be a hybrid. It must therefore be either a new species or a form 

 of 0. latijolia. As its main differences from the latter are dwarfness and narrowness 

 of leaf, which disappear under more congenial surroundings, it can hardly be 

 regarded as a new species. 



ORCHIS LATIFOLIA var. EBORENSIS x MACULATA 



PI. H, fig. 3 



Tubers palmate; stem solid. Leaves narrow, more acuminate and erect than in 

 O. eborensis, with rather larger not ringed spots, the upper linear-lanceolate, acuminate 

 with small spots. Spike short {± 6 cm.), lax, few-flowered (± 15). Bracts lanceolate, 

 narrow, acuminate, the lowest 2-5 cm. x 4-5 mm. Flowers like those of 0. maculata, 

 but for the spur. Sepals lanceolate obtuse, the lateral spotted. Petals slightly 

 shorter and broader. Lip 3-lobed, pale with rather bright red- violet loops, dots and 

 streaks; side-lobes rounded but not very broad, mid-lobe tongue-shaped, 3-4 mm. 



' Syn. Ill, 737. Plant small, only 10-15 cm. Leaves three, narrow, up to 3-5 cm. long Plants 



from the Alps retained their distinctive habit in the Botanical Garden. Apart from the later flowering 

 period they differed much from the form of the plains cultivated with them by the tongue-shaped 

 abruptly acuminate leaves and the large brightly coloured flowers, which stand out well. (Translation.) 



