THE ORCHID REVIEW. iy 
atratum, which has just flowered in the collection of F red. Hardy, Esq., of 
Ashton-on-Mersey. It is a very fine thing, being of good shape and colour, 
and best comparable with C. x nitens superbum. The dorsal sepal is 
green with a broad white margin, and regularly spotted with large purple- 
brown blotches, those near the median nerve being as much as two lines 
in diameter. We are not quite sure which of the four names mentioned 
above is the oldest, but the present plant is evidently a variety of the same 
hybrid, and the above name may be provisionally applied, as it comes nearest 
to it in parentage. 
HYBRID SELENIPEDIUMS. 
WHEN completing our “‘ History of Orchid Hybridisation ” (vol. 1. p. 360), 
we promised to give a tabulated summary of the hybrids obtained in the 
different genera, in a form suitable for ready reference. Owing to various 
reasons the publication has been somewhat delayed, though not by any 
means lost sight of, but we now commence the list with the genus Seleni- 
pedium— a very clearly defined and natural group which until recently has 
scarcely been recognised in gardens. Some discussion has taken place at 
different times as to its distinctness, but the fact is that it occupies a sort of 
midway position between the ancestral group Apostasiez and Cypripedium, 
having retained the three-celled ovary and axile placentation of the former, 
and is fully entitled to generic recognition. We therefore adopt it without 
hesitation, and believe it will prove a decided convenience to have the 
various hybrids brought together, instead of being scattered about among 
those of Cypripedium, owing to the exigencies of an alphabetical arrange- 
ment, as at present. Had Reichenbach had the courage of his opinions 
when separating Selenipedium as a distinct genus, in 1854, the incon- 
venience of a change would scarcely have been felt, so few were the species 
then in cultivation, but he adopted a sort of double-barrelled nomenclature, 
giving one name for science and another for gardens—a system whose 
absurdity must be apparent to every one who will reflect a moment. 
A few words of explanation are necessary as to the arrangement adopted. 
The object being to give an analysis of the results obtained, and at the same 
time to indicate the possibilities of future work, a classified arrangement 
was finally adopted, as more suitable than either an alphabetical or a 
chronological one, neither of which could possibly give such graphic results, 
and the addition of an Index provides al] that is necessary for ready 
reference. Table I. gives a graphic representation of the various crosses 
which have been made; Table II. supplies their names, parentage, and 
raisers; Table III. indicates the original description, published figures, and 
synonymy; while an alphabetical Index completes the list. 
