Juw-Aveust, 1918.) THE ORCHID REVIEW. | re 
Ye TCS | 
.* history of the interesting natural hybrid Orchis folioso-maculata 
~ was given at’ page 125, also that of O. Hepburnii, then regarded as a 
closely allied hybrid, but which, from information since received, appears 
to be synonymous with the preceding. About the middle of June last, 
Sir Archibald Buchan Hepburn sent a fine living plant to Kew—which was 
planted on the rockwork—and gave its history as follows :—“ It is a natural 
hybrid that appeared on the lake bank at Smeaton some four years ago. 
Mr. Druce regarded O. latifolio-maculata as one of the parents, but I do 
not think that O. latifolia has anything to do with it, and that is Mr. T. A. 
Stephenson’s opinion also, but he adds that the specimen of O. maculata 
that I sent him is the variety O. Fuchsii, Druce. There are perhaps a 
dozen plants, growing in very wet soil on the bank, below the level of the 
ORCHIS HEPBURNII. 
O. foliosa parent.” 
About a fortnight later two fine specimens, including part of the basal 
leaves, were sent for preservation, and it was pointed out that one had 
spotted, the other unspotted leaves. Both of these inclined most to the 
O. foliosa parent in the size and colour of the flowers. A few days later 
another specimen was sent, which was much nearer to O. maculata in the 
shape of the spike and flowers, and in colour, though the plant was 
intermediate in other respects. With this specimen came a good plant of 
the other parent, and this was the familiar O. maculata, L., which is 
common in the district, and which, as previously pointed out (0.R., XXiil., 
Pp. 253), has been redescribed under the name of O. Fuchsii. It is highly 
satisfactory to have the complete history of the plant and such excellent 
materials for preservation. As to the amount of variation, it Is largely a 
repetition of Mr. Wolley Dod’s experience, for he remarked that plain and 
spotted leaves were equally common. It thus appears that the record, O. 
foliosa x latifolio-maculata, requires to be amended to O. foliosa x 
maculata, but that the specific name, O. Hepburnii, Druce, can be retained, 
given by Mr. Wolley Dod. For those who 
Prefer the graphic system of indicating the parentage in the name, O. 
s the limitation that It Is too 
folioso-maculata is available, but there 1 
unwieldly for secondary hybrids, and even for primary hybrids it requires 
change with any necessary amendment of par 
impossible in the case of hybrids of unknown origin, 
originally described as species. In the present case the acceptance of O. 
Fuchsii as a parent would involve a change of name, but this we dv not 
admit, for there is no doubt that the O. maculata, L., is the familiar plant 
that has always been understood by the name. R.A.R. 
none having been originally 
entage, besides being 
many of which were 
