THE ORCHID REVIEW. 



DIES ORCHIDIANI. 



My comments on the Report of the Commission appointed to examine the 

 system of growing Orchids in leaf-mould had to be deferred on account of 

 want of space (see page 324 of the previous volume), and the succeeding 

 number seems to have been handed over to the Index makers, who not 

 ■only monopolized the customary eight pages, but required two additional 

 ■ones to complete their work, and of course something had to be squeezed 

 ■out. But the space could not have been put to a better purpose, and it is 

 difficult to see how one could find the different items of information with- 

 out such a useful guide. I think someone has said that a work of reference 

 without an index is an abomination. Now to the Report of that Commission. 



It is most interesting to have such full details of the new treatment, but 

 the question as to whether we may adopt it with confidence is hardly 

 settled. The Commission speaks of marvellous results; nevertheless it 

 advises caution, and suggests that amateurs should experiment on a small 

 scale before adopting the treatment generally. The members would like to 

 renew the visit when the plants are in full growth, so as to be able to form 

 a better judgment. I would suggest that they should visit M. Delanghe's 

 •establishment, where the treatment has been practised longer— indeed it was 

 the marvellous results obtained by the latter that induced Messrs. Duval to 

 adopt the system. And we read that Messrs. Duval had obtained from M. 

 Delanghe, for the special edification of the Commission, a clump of Cattleya 

 Mossiai which was potted in this compost five years ago, and had not 

 since been touched— until " we broke the pot, and were astonished to find 

 that the compost was quite fresh, and in sufficiently good condition to be 

 used to-day." And if the examination of a single plant was so astonishing, 

 what might not the examination of a whole collection have been ? The 

 plant was presumably healthy, and five years should suffice to show whether 

 the treatment was beneficial or the reverse. It is certainly a little discon- 

 certing to be told that " it is not necessary to water the plants ' — as if they 

 •were succulents indeed !— but if " a light syringing of each pot" maintains 



