Marcu-ApriL, 1919.1 ' THE ORCHID REVIEW. 
IS 
E are now able to supplement the history of the interesting hybrid 
from Odontoglossum maculatum X Rossii whose history was given 
at pp. 4-6. The plant was exhibited at the meetings of the R.H.5. Orchid 
and Scientific Committees held on February 25th, and by the latter was 
awarded a Certificate of Appreciation in recognition of the scientificinterest 
4l 
ODONTOGLOSSUM HUMEANUM. \@| 
of the experiment to prove the parentage of the natural hybrid. A painting 
has also been made for preservation at Kew, to which establishment the 
plant has now been presented. 
The tradition of a second natural hybrid still lingers, and was mentioned 
by Mr..J. O’Brien at the meeting of the Orchid Committee. As there was 
no record of the exhibit in the Gardeners’ Chronicle report, we sent a short 
-history of the question, which appeared at p. 121, andat p.136 Mr. O’Brien 
replied : ‘‘ The statement reflecting on the correctness of the record of O.- 
Humeanum, Rchb. f., . . . which is based only on conjecture, tends to 
obscure the important fact that the home-raised specimen shown by Mr. 
Rolfe satisfactorily establishes the correctness and record of O. aspersum.” 
But the latter record has never been in doubt, and was as clearly stated in 
Reichenbach’s original note as in my recent one, consequently there was 
nothing to obscure. And my remarks were not based on conjecture, but on 
a careful examination of all the facts available. I have never believed in the 
existence of a natural hybrid between O. Rossii and O. cordatum, partly 
because no evidence had been found that the two grow together (see p. 44), 
partly because of the absence of O. cordatum characters from the known 
hybrids; and this was the basis of our experiment. As long ago as April, 1889, 
Mr. O’Brien sent to Kew flowers of “O. Humeanum” from two different 
plants, which are carefully preserved with the record as received. Three 
years later two others were sent by him, As recently as February last the 
name and parentage were repeated (see G. C., p. 52), but the characters of 
the hybrid are those of O. maculatum, as the recent experiment has confirmed. 
_ That Mr. Burnley Hume’s original plant was something else is a tradition, 
which after 43 years cannot yet be established, and no artificial hybrid 
between the two is vet known. The appearance of such a hybrid would 
Probably establish ‘the distinctness of O. Humeanum, Rchb. f., and we 
hope to see the experiment made. oO 
One other record deserves mention. The report of the R.H.S. Scientific 
Committee for March 11th contains the following (G.C., p- 145) 5) ‘* Odonto- 
glossum aspersum.—Mr. G. Wilson showed several early drawings of the 
plant known as O. Humeanum and the alleged parents, and of O. aspersum 
