THE ORCHID REVIEW. 197 
After this, who will venture to ask, what’s in a name? However, it 
occurred to me to look up the question of priority, but, unfortunately, I 
failed to find a record of the name L. p. Statteriana, though I traced L. p. 
Annie Louise back to 1897. It was exhibited before the Manchester 
Orchid Society on October 21st of that year, and received an Award of 
Merit (O. R., v., p. 346); also by Mrs. Briggs-Bury, on July 14th, 1808, 
and received a similar award (O. R., vi., p. 253), so that I do not quite see 
why the Society should have used the Temple exhibit in justification of the 
change of name. L. p. Mrs. R.I. Measures, it would appear must relinquish 
the claim to priority, for it received an Award of Merit from the R.H.S. on 
October 26th, 1897 (O. R., v., p. 350). Five days too late! But I am quite 
willing to accept its identity, and even to consider it as part of the same 
identical plant, at all events until it is proved to the contrary. 
Whether the matter will rest here remains to be proved, but I have seen 
a remarkably similar form before, and should not be at all surprised to find 
that it is practically undistinguishable from something that appeared long 
ago. The question of priority if applied to varieties will land us in some 
nice difficulties. Will anyone pretend that all the multitudinous varieties of 
a few of our popular garden Orchids are distinct ? Take Cattleya Mossiz, 
for example, where we have more distinct names than varieties. Some of 
the principal variations occur in nearly every importation, and one might 
almost say get a new name every time. Scarcely a meeting is held now-a- 
days without various “‘new”’ varieties appearing, and if those who name 
them so freely make any attempt to ascertain whether they have been named 
before they are singularly unfortunate. I repeatedly meet old friends under 
new names, and some have so many aliases that I have forgotten which is 
the original name. Some of our reporters heroically try to put them on 
record—I mean the names—but how to distinguish them seems a perfectly 
hopeless task. A rash individual, some time ago, proposed that no one 
should be allowed to name a new variety without proving its distinctness. 
I say rash, but all the same I wish his ideas could be carried out. 
ARGUS. 
EPIDENDRUM CONFUSUM. 
Tuis is the Epidendrum fragrans var. megalanthum of Lindley (Fol. Orch., 
Epidend., p. 39) a plant originally sent from Guatemala, by Mr. Skinner, 
to the Horticultural Society, in whose garden it flowered in July, 1849. 
Lindley remarked of it—‘ remarkable for the gigantic dimensions, which it 
retains in cultivation; the flowers are full four inches in diameter, and its 
pseudobulbs and leaves, taken together, are sometimes eighteen inches 
long.” It has since appeared on several occasions, always with the same 
