THE ORCHID REVIEW. 269 
37. C. Warscewiczul, Rchb. f. (C. gigas, Linden; C. imperialis, 
Hort.; C. Sanderiana, Hort.; C. labiata var. Warscewiczii, Rchb. f.).— 
New Granada. : 
38. C. MAXIMA, Lindl.—Ecuador and North Peru. 
39. C. Dow1ana, Batem. (C. aurea, Linden; C. labiata var. Dowiana, 
Veitch.).—Costa Rica and New Granada. 
4o. C. Erporapo, Linden (C. Wallisii, Linden; C. crocata, Rchb. £3 
C. virginalis, Lind. and Andre ; C. trichopiliochila, Rodr. ; C. labiata var. 
Eldorado, Veitch ; C. McMorlandii, Nich.)—Rio Negro District, Brazil. 
41. C. Rex, O’Brien.—Habitat not recorded. 
42. C. IRICOLOR, Rchb. f.—Habitat unknown. 
C. LuTEoLa, Lindl. (C. Holfordii, Hort.).—Upper Amazons, in 
Peru and Brazil. 
Group of CATTLEYA CITRINA.—Plant wholly pendulous. Pseudobulbs 
ovoid, 2- or 3-leaved. Flowers yellow, with subconnivent segments and 
entire lip. A single anomalous species. 
44. C. ciTrina, Lindl. (C. Karwinskii, Mart.).—South Mexico. 
Natural hybrids are omitted from the above; otherwise we believe it to 
be a practically complete list of the various known forms, with their prin- 
cipal synomyms, arranged in such a way as to show their natural affinities 
—so far as this is possible in a linear arrangement. And now, what is the 
value of these different forms? Which are species and which varieties? 
Two or three are still imperfectly known, and in these cases the question 
cannot be answered with absolute certainty, but with this exception we 
believe the above to be distinct natural forms, which it is necessary to dis- 
tinguish by name. Some are now called species in the various Manuals and 
others only varieties, but it is certain that some of the latter are as distinct 
as some of the former, if not more so. To take one or two examples—and 
not the most glaring ones either—Why should C. maxima be a species and 
C. Warscewiczii only a variety of C. labiata? Or if C. porphyroglossa is a 
_ species why are C. amethystoglossa and C. Leopoldi only varieties of C. 
guttata? Each shows a fairly equal amount of difference as compared 
with its nearest ally, and an equal absence of intermediate connecting 
links; and each so-called “variety” has itself begun to break up into 
varieties. The latter point is important, and we think may fairly be applied 
as a test in the case of closely allied forms of somewhat doubtful rank. 
When a form has passed into this stage it has become something more 
than a mere variety. It has become at least a sub-species, and unless it 
passes into its allies by a series of connecting links, should be treated as a 
species. It may be said to have already become, autonomous. It is well 
known that many species are only separated by slight differences, and yet 
have varieties of their own, just as we find in many of the above Cattleyas. 
Sub-species perhaps they might be termed, but they should be treated as 
