150 THE QGRCHID REVIEW. [Juty, agi. 
HE mention (at p. 131) of the curious made-up figure, in which a scape 
of Cypripedium Hartwegii is shown growing from a plant of C. 
caudatum, and producing flowers of the latter, reminds us of a few other 
remarkable Orchidological mistakes. - 
There is the fine coloured plate of Galeandra Baueri in Batemen’s — 
Orchidaceae of Mexico & Guatemala (t. 19), on a copy of which Lindley (in 
his own Herbarium) has written: “ This is made up of two very different 
plants.” It was not further explained, and Reichenbach merely added 
(Walp. Ann., vi. p. 649): “‘Icon. phantastica horribilis florulenta foliis — 
cauleque minus correctis.” The origin of the mistake may be foundin — 
Bateman’s text, where it is explained that a Mexican plant in the collection a 
of Mr. Barker produced flowers in the autumn of 1839, and ‘‘ from these, 
assisted by native specimens more recently discovered by Mr. Skinner im 
Guatemala, Miss Drake prepared the exquisite drawing from which the — 
accompanying plate was taken.” Some clue as to what these native — 
specimens may have been was given by Lindley, in 1840, when figuring the 
plant (Bot. Reg., xxvi. t. 49), for he speaks of “‘ Another plant now to be — 
found in several collections, and called Galeandra Baueri, but which is much 
more branched, and has not yet flowered.” At all events the habit, as : 
figured by Miss Drake, is exactly that of Chysis bractescens, a species 
which during recent years has been collected in Guatemala by Turckheim, 
and which we strongly suspect was also collected there by Mr. Skinnet, — 
though we have failed to find a record. Curiously enough, the error has 
been perpetuated by Puydt (Orch., p. 197, fig. 193), who has copied Miss 
Drake’s drawing without acknowledging the source. 
And this is not the sum total of the confusion, for Bateman’s Galeandr@ 
Baueri is not the original one of Lindley, which is a native of Guiana 
Both Bateman and Lindley discuss the difference in the native county, 
and, curiously enough, when four years later the true Guiana plant did 
appear in cultivation, Lindley redescribed it under the name of G. cristata 
adding one more to the comedy of errors. The Mexican plant is 10W = 
known as G. Batemanii Rolfe (Gard. Chron., 189Q1, li. p. 430). a 
Such a case is fairly paralleled by that of Phalznopsis amabilis, which — 
had long been known as a native of Java until the name was applied by 
Lindley os a plant that had been introduced to cultivation by Cuming from 
the Philippines, and which Lindley then considered identical. The curio 
thing, however, was that when a few years later the true Javan plant wat 
introduced, by Thomas Lobb, Lindley failed to recognise it, and ‘5? 
MISTAKES IN ORCHIDOLOGY. 
