226 THE ORCHID REVIEW. [OcToBER, 1917 
remarkable for its more brilliant colour. The occasion was the great show 
of autumn-blooming Orchids, and no fewer than fifty plants of C. Fabia 
were exhibited, bearing an aggregate of over 260 flowers. The two varieties” 
came from two different crosses, and are marked by the differences just 
pointed out. The most brilliantly-coloured variety that we remember is 
Vigeriana, raised by M. Ch. Maron, in which the peculiar saturated colour 
of C. labiata flammea (which was the pollen parent) persists. It is 
figured at p. 89 of our sixteenth volume. At the other end of the series is 
the variety alba, having white sepals and petals, and a richly-coloured lip, 
the white denoting the influence of C. labiata alba. 
Such a brilliant hybrid was naturally soon in request as a parent, and at 
the present time we find that it has been re-crossed with both its original 
parents, with five other species of the labiata group, with ten hybrid 
Cattleyas, including the natural hyorid C. Hardyana, and with C. velutina. 
Outside the limits of the genus we find combinations with Lelia pumila’ 
Brassavola Digbyana, a dozen Leliocattleyas, four Brassocattleyas, two 
Sophrocattleyas, one Sophrolelia, and three Sophrocatlezlias, with others to 
follow. A comparison of the whole series would be interesting. 
—— 
Cae 
ORE 
a 
i 
PHAL/ENOPSIS GERSENII. a 
i FORTUNATE circumstance has led to the recovery of an important 
type drawing, including an interesting Phalenopsis that has been 
completely lost sight of. In 1862 a Phalenopsis was described under 
the name of P. zebrina var. Gerseni (Teijsm. & Binn. in Nat. Tijdschr. 
Nederl. Ind., xxiv. p. 320), but it now proves to be quite distinct. The 
circumstances of its recovery are interesting. There is a drawing in the 
Kew collection of Illigera pulchra, Blume, a Malayan climbing shrub, 
which is localised, ‘‘ Banca, Binnendijk.” A _ reference to this drawing had 
to be made, when it was noticed that there was a painting on the reverse 
side of the paper, which proved to be three single flowers of Phalznopsis. 
The names had been added by Sir J. D. Hooker, and on reference to the 
Hooker correspondence a letter was found, from M. J. Binnendijk, dated 
May Ist, 1861, in which it is remarked: “ Inclosed I send you a sketch of 
three Phalznopsis flowers, n. 1. Ph. zebrina, n. 2, Ph. z. var. Gerseni, and 
n. 3, Ph. violacea, of which there is another variety with white flowers, all 
of which may be of great value to amateurs.” The others mentioned were 
described at the same time, but P. zebrina afterwards proved synonymous 
with P. sumatrana, Rchb. f., and P. violacea had been described just 
previously by Reichenbach under the same name. The paintings are 
most carefully done, and quite life-like, and the interesting point is that th¢ 
Se 
