NOVEMBER 1911. THE ORCHID REVIEW. aa2 
word, or may it contain more words? Certain authors, as Messrs. Rolfe 
and Hurst, invariably adopt only one word, even when the name was 
published in Latin. Example: Cattleya x Memoria Bleui begomes according 
to them C. X Bleui. 
Reply.—These specific names should consist of a single word. 
Question.—If the specific names of hybrids are to be expressed in the 
vulgar tongue, should names consisting of three, four, five, or sometimes 
more words be permitted? Examples: Cattleya x Mademoiselle Marie 
Henriette de Wavrin (Rev. Hort. Belge, 1905, p. 272); Cypripedium x 
Mademoiselle Germaine Sellier de Gisors (Journ. Soc. Hort. France, 1893, 
p. 652); Cypripedium X Souvenir de Madame Jules Dupré (Ibid., 1894, 
p- 583); Cypripedium xX hybridum Frau Geheimrat Borsig (Gartenflora, 
1892, p. 393, t. 1501). 
Reply.—See answers to the two preceding questions. 
Question.— Varieties of hybrids.—The following rule is generally adopted 
by English horticulturists, and is strictly observed by Messrs. Rolfe and 
Hurst in their Orchid Stud-Book :— 
“All the hybrids arising from the crossing of the same two species carry 
the same specific name. All forms proceeding from the same crossing or 
from successive crossing of varieties of these two species are attached as 
varieties to the same specific name.” 
Should this rule, which seems indispensable in order to avoid the 
creation of an incalculable number of useless specific names, be adopted ? 
Thus, in 1894, following the flowering of the first crossing resulting from 
the fertilisation of Cypripedium Spicerianum by C. x nitens, different 
plants of that single crossing received sixteen distinct specific names. 
Subsequently twenty other names were given to products of the same cross. 
In applying the foregoing rule these 36 names ought to have been assigned 
as varietal names under the same specific name (C. X aureum). 
It is to be remarked that, in spite of the application of this rule, Messrs. 
Rolfe and Hurst still admit 758 specific names for hybrids obtained up to 
January Ist, 1909, in the genus Paphiopedilum, a subdivision of the old 
‘Cypripedium. 
Reply.—The rule enunciated in the second paragraph of the section 
should be strictly adhered to. But when the parents of a hybrid are trans- 
ferred to a new (or to another) genus, then the name of the hybrid follows, 
and the specific name would follow the rules applying to species under 
similar conditions. 
‘Passing on to the subject of bigeneric hybrids, the Society recommends 
the adoption of one of its own rules—not always carried into practice, 
unfortunately-—that the specific name should be written in Latin; and in 
