324 THE ORCHID REVIEIV. 
The whole thing is beyond my comprehension, and I can only ask again, 
Where are we going ? 
In your September issue I called attention to the announcement of a 
series of so-called new varieties of Cattleya Mossiz, and these have since 
been described and afew of them figured in Lindenia. The Gardeners’ 
Chronicle for October 5th, thus comments on the subject (p. 388) :—‘‘ As it is 
clear that accurate lines of demarcation and classification cannot be drawn 
for these individual forms, is it not desirable to call them all—as some are 
already—by names such as Quetelet, Crépin, Dumortier, Morren, Spring, 
Kickx, Van Beneden ?”’ To this query I would unhesitatingly answer No! 
The number of “ individual forms”’ of Cattleya Mossiz in cultivation can be 
counted by the hundred, and my deliberate opinion is that it is not desir- 
able to call them all by names, even in the vernacular, which is what the 
suggestion practically amounts to, if it means anything at all. What is the 
use of naming multitudes of so-called varieties which can neither be distin- 
guished nor classified ? The same range of variation appears in every im- 
portation of Cattleya Mossie, and many of the so-called new varieties above 
alluded to cannot be distinguished from the old ones—indeed, no attempt is 
made to distinguished them. It is a complete farce to name varieties after 
this fashion, and the fault lies in the system, not inthe particular name 
applied. What we want is some method of classifying the different varia- 
tions which occur under their respective types, not a mere multiplication of 
so-called varieties which can neither be distinguished nor classified, which 
will only make confusion worse confounded. 
ARGUS. 
pee eienaehe oP i ah 
CATASETUM CHRISTYANUM. 
A very curious form of Catasetum Christyanum has just appeared in the 
collection of Sir Trevor Lawrence, Bart., Burford, Dorking, on a plant 
which last year produced a raceme of the well-known male flowers. On 
this occasion the raceme bore two flowers which are in a curious transition 
state between the two sexes. They differ from the males (Orchid Album, ii., 
t. 83) in having the sepals and petals equally spreading, the latter marbled 
with a rather lighter shade ; the lip with a greenish-yellow, nearly flat limb, 
which is entire except for the short purple marginal hairs; the sac nearly 
an inch deep; and the column shorter and much stouter, with partially 
developed stigma and imperfect anther. The colour was not much altered. 
The antennz were much shorter than usual, but retained their function, as 
when touched the stipes and pollinia were ejected with some force. The 
pollinia were very small and not attached to the stipes. The female, I 
believe, is not yet known. R.A.R. 
