PL. CCCXXVII. 
CXE RIPEDIUM EXUL O'BRIEN var. IMSCHOOTIANUM ROLFE. 
THE EXILE CYPRIPEDIUM, VAN IMSCHOOT’S VARIETY. 
CYPRIPEDIUM. Vide Lindenia, Engl. ed., vol. I, p. 3r. 
Cypripedium exul. Herba caespitosa. Folia rigida, suberecta, 
carinata, 0.23-0.30 m. longa, 2-2.6 cm. lata, 
cucullata, lanceolato-oblonga, glabra, viridis. 
pauca, elongato-linearia, brevissime bidentata, subtus 
viridia. Scapus 15-20 cm. longus, pubescens, purpureus v, viridis. Bractea 
Ovarium triquetrum, rostratum, pubescens. Sepalum posticum ovato- 
oblongum, circa 4.5 cm. longum, dorso pubescente, basi et centro late viridi maculis atropurpureis, margine et apice 
late albo. Sepala lateralia connata, herbaceo- -viridia, ovato-oblonga, cymbiformia, dorso pubescente, Petala lineari- 
oblonga, apice paullo latiora, subobtusa, flavo- virentia, linea mediana brunnescente ad basin, maculis paucis atropur- 
pureis, margine ciliato. Labellum circa 3 cm. longum, flavescens, venosum, marginibus involutis, extus politum, intus 
pubescens. Columna 6 mm. longa, subteres, pub Staminodi 
late elliptico-ovatum, politum, ad basin pubescens, 
umbone medio ocreo paullo elevato, subtus carinatum, omnino pubescens. Capsula purpurea, pubescens, rostrata, rostro 
curvulo 4 cm. longo. 
Cypripedium exul O'BRIEN, in Gard. Chron., 1892, pt. I, pp. 522-523, fig. 77. 
C. insigne var. exul RipLey, in Gard. Chron., 1891, pt. II, p. 94. 
Var. Imschootianum. Scapus viridis. Bractea brevior, Margo sepali postici angustior, sepalum anticum angus- 
tius. Petala angustiora, apice albida. 
Var. Imschootianum ROLFE, supra. 
C. insigne var. Imschootianum L. LInD.; Fourn, d. Orch., Ul, p. 37. 
=q he subject of the present plate is a plant of very great interest. It was 
at first thought to be a variety of C. insigne, but the only one with 
ma Which it can be compared is the Siamese C. insigne var. exul, described 
By M' Ritey last year. To this it undoubtedly does bear a close resemblance, as 
will be pointed out presently, but the question suggests itself to me whether that 
plant is really a variety of C. insigne at all. Last autumn I sawa large importation 
of this particular plant, together with a coloured drawing. In the former I could 
not see any evidence of C. insigne, though the drawing certainly bore a consi- 
derable resemblance to that species, yet there were certain discrepancies which 
I could not understand. And now, having seen a plant which has flowered in the 
collection of R. I. Measures, Esq., of Cambridge Lodge, Flodden Road, Cam- 
berwell, it only confirms my suspicion that we have a distinct species, and not 
a variety of C. insigne, to deal with. , 
C. insigne and its numerous varieties have spreading leaves, while the Siamese 
plant has more or less erect leaves, which, with other differences, renders the two 
quite dissimilar; and no one seeing the Siamese plant out of flower would think 
for a moment of C. insigne, but rather of a narrow-leaved form of C. iia Sci 
Comparing the plant with the Nepalese C. insigne, Mr Riptey observes : — “ It is 
very distinct as a variety, both in form and colouring. The leaves are shorter and 
Ve 
