148 THE ORCHID REVIEW. (Juny, torr. 
Among the plants tigured we notice two new species, Mystacidium Alicize 
(t. 6, fig. B), dedicated to Miss Alice Pegler, and Eulophia Pillansii (t. 27), 
to Mr. N. S. Pillans, both of whom sent him numerous living species. We 
may also mention the pretty little Cynorchis compacta, Polystachya 
pubescens, Stenoglottis fimbriata, Satyrium coriifolium, S. foliosum (t. 50), 
one of the rarest of South African Orchids, which has hitherto only been 
found in one spot, or within a few hundred yards of one spot, and of which 
the Author remarks “the flowers are, fortunately for its survival, a dull 
yellow, turning brown in age, or its extinction by the Vandals of Cape Town 
might be feared within a very short space of time,’ the handsome Disa 
uniflora, D. Telipogon, a rare and long-lost species, D. Charpentieriana 
(t. 77), a species having a long remarkable lip, ‘‘ which as it sways about in 
the wind suggests a possible means of attraction for insects,” D. racemosa, 
Corymbis Welwitschii (t. 99), a West African species, now found growing 
in swampy shady places at the mouth of the St. John’s River, &c. 
There are two or three determinations with which we cannot agree. For 
example, the South African Ansellia gigantea, Rchb. f., is figured (t. 29) 
as A. africana, Lindl., and we cannot consider Habenaria Boltoni, Harv., as 
a variety of H. Bonatea (t. 45). 
There is one departure from the old arrangement which we cannot call 
an improvement, the plates being placed together at the end of the volume, 
and the text at the beginning, but as the text belonging to each plate is 
printed on a separate sheet, nothing is gained by the arrangement, while the 
continual turning backwards and forwards from text to plate and vice versa 
is distracting. The old arrangement of having the plate opposite to the 
corresponding text, as in the Botanical Magazine, is far preferable. It is 
apparently more than a detail in binding the work, for the position of the 
numbers on the plates has been altered, so that rebinding on the earlier plan 
would not secure absolute uniformity. 
We learn that a number of additional plates have been drawn, sufficient 
for the greater part of another volume, and that it is hoped to publish them, 
which we certainly hope will be found possible, as figures of such remark- 
ably complex plants are invaluable for identification purposes. 
ACROLoPHIA Botusit (Rolfe)—A curious mistake was discovered in 
working out the Orchids for the Flora Capensis, namely that in the first 
volume of the above work the name of Eulophia micrantha, Lindl., has been 
transferred to E. cochlearis, Lindl., and that of the latter to a third species, 
while the former has since been described as a new species by Schlechter, 
under the name of Acrolophia fimbriata, Acrolophia being a genus separated 
from Eulophia on account of its terminal inflorescence and other characters. 
This was communicated to Dr. Bolus, and is alluded to under t. 8, where 
