REVIEW AND INFERENCES. 21 



X Veitchiix), Florence is absurd, and many more cases 

 like this can be cited. Such should not happen any 

 more in future, and should be suppressed if forced upon 

 the orchid growers. 



What 1 did in Classifying. 



My arrangement of the list is so plain that no explana- 

 tion is called for. I have followed the rules laid down 

 above, and handled the material on hand without creat- 

 ing any new names. I let the established ones pass re- 

 view and list them according to their qualifications. 



If a hybrid was mentioned as having been raised, and 

 nothing but the parentage was given, it is entered as 

 found, and thus indexed. 



If the seed-bearing plant was mentioned as such, I 

 have marked it in every case. If the cross in question 

 was repeated at some other place, and is arranged by 

 me in the proper line, I have again noted which of the 

 parents was the seed-bearing plant, provided such came 

 to my knowledge. If I say " also raised by so-and-so," 

 it means that the same parentage was used at that time, 

 whatever it was in the first case. If no sex was marked 

 in the first instance, it is to be understood that I am not 

 acquainted either with the sexes used for the duplicated 

 cross, provided I have not stated otherwise. 



As I have recorded all crosses coming to my knowl- 

 edge, even if they did not reach the flowering stage at 

 the time of registering, my list contains already material 

 with which we may meet again on future occasions. It 

 must be remembered, though, that such crosses are not 

 indexed so as not to interfere with the crosses known 

 under the joint-names. I considered it wise to take 

 cognizance of those hybrids nearing the time of their 



