200 THE ORCHID REVIEW. 
suggest that another year a class be set apart for the best six Orchids of 
hybrid origin, and let us then note the result. 
I observe a note in a recent issue of Garden and Forest, by Mr. Watson, 
to the effect that Miltonia x Bleuana virginalis, which received a First- 
class Certificate at the Temple show, would be more correctly designated 
Miltonia vexillaria virginalis. ‘‘ Whatever its origin,’ he remarks, “it is 
simply a form of the last named, a superb one, truly, but bearing no 
evidences of its reputed hybrid origin.” I can only express my astonish- 
ment at the remark, for I not only saw the plant, but I have an excellent 
figure before me at the present moment. The plant certainly has the long 
column, and the rosy blotch at the base of the petals (the latter point is 
even recorded by the writer), which show the influence of the pollen parent, 
M. Roezlii, just the same as in all other forms of this hybrid. How they 
came there I leave to my readers to judge, without attempting to account 
for their being overlooked by the author of the note in question. 
‘* Shall we ever get a universal language?” The question is not mine, 
but comes from a recent number of the Gardeners’ Chronicle, in commenting 
on an exhibit at the recent Paris Exhibition. It was the fine hybrid 
Cypripedium xX Gertrude Hollington, sent by Messrs. Hugh Low & Co. 
‘Our French friends seem to have been puzzled by the name,” it remarks, 
“ for we find it spelt Kollington and Collington; while in some cases the 
name is judiciously, perhaps, not given at all.” It appears, however, that 
it was sold to M. Tournier, of Marseilles, for £120, and this gentleman, T 
presume, will be able to cope with the difficulty. And this brings me 
again to the starting point. Is M. Tournier a universalist ?—if I must use 
such a word. _ If so the hybrid may re-appear as Hollingtonia—not that it 
would remove the difficulty about the initial letter, but this, however, is not 
the point. I well remember when Cypripedium x Charles Canham 
appeared—perhaps its author was not a universalist—and how promptly 
the name was changed to Canhamii. But now we have changed all that, 
and we name our hybrids in so many languages and according to so many 
systems that really I have lost count. And not only this, but we now want 
almost as many names as there are seedlings in a capsule, as I recently 
pointed out. There is a large amount of sound common sense in that 
question, ‘* Shall we ever get a universal language ?” 
I do not intend to answer the conundrum propounded in the last para- 
graph, for the simple reason that I don’t know, and under such circumstances 
prophecy is proverbially difficult. I have read over again my former 
remarks on this subject (notably those at pages 12, 72, and 136), which 
