272 THE ORCHID REVIEW. (SEPTEMBER, 1914, 
of R. Imschootiana, but the flowers are only half as large, and different in 
structure. The colour is yellow, with the side lobes and upper half of the 
lip crimson.—l.c., p. 214. [The species received an Award of Merit at the 
Holland House Show.—See p. 213 of our July issue.} 
ANGRAECUM BIRRIMENSE, Rolfe.—An ally of A. Eichlerianum, Kranzl., 
described from a dried specimen sent from the Birrim District, on the Gold 
Coast, by Mr. A. C. Miles. A living plant was also sent which is now in 
the Kew collection.—l.c., p. 214. 
DENDROBIUM PapiLio.—A flower of a very striking Dendrobium has 
been sent from the collection of E. D. Bostock, Esq., Stone, Staff. It was 
purchased some years ago out of an importation as D. Papilio, and is 
evidently the true Philippine species of that name. D. Papilio was 
described by M. Loher about seventeen years ago (Gard. Chron., 1897, i 
p- 416), as follows: ‘A charming species of the crumenatum group. Its 
large, solitary, pale rose flowers hang down from their thin grass-like stems 
in great profusion, resembling butterflies suspended in the air. The sepals 
and petals of the nearly two-inch wide flowers are ovate, and the broad 
undulate lip is long stipitate, with a few purple veins. The fragrant 
flowers last only one or two days.” The only dried specimen at Kew is an 
imported plant that died on the way home, and consequently is without 
flowers, but it is probable that Mr. Bostock’s plant came from an 
authentic source, as the flower agrees well with the. technical description, 
except that the ground colour is white, with a very faint shade of blush, 
which contrasts effectively with the purple veining on the lip. This may 
indicate variation. The species, however, belongs to the Section Pedilonum. 
A well-grown plant would be a striking object. R.A. 
en convenient 
heir 
said 
BULBOPHYLLUM VITIENSE.—Geographical names are oft 
in the case of large genera, but a good deal of caution is necessary in t 
application to garden plants. Over twenty years ago a Bulbophyllum, : 
to have been received from the Botanical Station, Fiji, was describe 
under the name of B. vitiense (Rolfe in Kew Bulletin, 1893, P- 5) It — 
said to be very distinct from B. rostriceps, Rchb, f., the only other spec! 
then known from Fiji, but its exact affinity was not made out. Over . 
year later a Liberian Bulbophyllum that flowered at the Royal Bola 
Garden, Glasnevin, was identified as B. cocoinum, Lindl., a speci® © ada 
i 
lost sight of, and later on it flowered at Kew among Orchids Tece : 
from Accra. B. vitiense could not be distinguished from them, and 
became evident that some mistake had been made in the Fiji habitat 
and that the name must be cancelled. Both plants are again in bloom 
Kew, and are certainly forms of one. R: 
