oh THE ORCHID REVIEW. 
~ of the Horticultural Society in August, 1829; Colax viridis, then called 
Maxillaria viridis ((.c., t. 1510), a Brazilian species from the same collec- 
tion; Oncidium cornigerum (l.c., t. 1 542), from the collection of the Hon. 
and Rev. W. Herbert; Epidendrum variegatum (Bot. Mag., t. 3151), from 
the collection of Richard Harrison, Esq.; also Maxillaria picta (i.c., 
t. 3154) and Colax placanthera, then called Maxillaria placanthera (t. 3173), 
both from the collection of Mrs. Arnold Harrison, who was also an accom- 
plished artist, as may be seen by the figures in the work in question, 
which bear her name. & ; 
It is evident that the Harrisons exerted a great influence on Orchid 
culture about this period, and that Brazil was a never-failing source of 
novelties. 
(To be continued.) 
PHAIUS TUBERCULOSUS. 
I OBSERVE a note in the Gardeners’ Magazine for February 23rd (p. 116), 
by H. J. C., to the effect that the recently introduced Phaius is a natural 
hybrid between Phaius Humblotii and the species known in cultivation for 
nearly twenty years as P. tuberculosus. The writer adds that he has-no 
hesitation in saying that the plant is unmistakably intermediate, and that the 
characters are so pronounced as to have been recognized by every practical 
man present. It is unfortunate that P. Humblotii was not present too, 
rH. J. C. would not have been quite so sure of his ground. I had 
previously been through the question, though with another object, and had 
these perfectly obvious intermediate characters been present I should 
hardly have overlooked them. H. J. C. does not tell us what they are, and 
- I suspect that he had not P. Humblotii before him, or he must have seen 
that its crest is of a totally different character. In fact, there is nothing{in 
the characters ofthe three plents, or in their distribution (for M. Warpur 
states that P. Humblotii grows far away from the other two), to warrant this 
confident opinion. Those who want plants of the true P. tuberculosus 
will never get it by crossing P. Humblotii and P. simulans. 
A statement has also been publicly made, in another quarter, that it is 
impossible to say which species Thouars’ orginal flower belongs to, in the 
absence of pseudobulbs and leaves. This, fortunately, is an entire mis- — 
conception of the facts. The floral differences are well marked, and there 
is not the slightest doubt about the facts already stated. It is unfortunate 
that the mistake was made, and, now that it has been discovered, the 
best way out of the difficulty is to remedy it as quickly as possible. 
R. A. ROLFE. 
eS 7 
