138 THE ORCHID REVIEW. 
ORCHID NOMENCLATURE. 
** ARGus”’ and Mr. Rehder have on pages g7 and 112 each given me some 
hints, and I will reply to them together. ‘‘Argus’”’ says, ‘‘on the whole 
the arrangement has worked well.” As this matter seems at present to 
. turn upon the accuracy of the names of plants submitted to the committee 
no one can deny that the series of paintings have materially benefited the 
working of the arrangement. Before these were instituted it was all 
memory, and consequently partly confusion; and even now they are not 
enough in themselves alone, for properly prepared lists of all species and 
varieties should be made and kept up to date so that any old variety could 
beat once detected did it chance to appear under anew name. For not com- 
forming to the rules, at present known by so very few exhibitors, one can 
hardly blame anybody, as without any ‘official record but the “ Certificate 
List ” of the R. H. S., how is one to know what names have been given 
previously ? For many things there are that are not in that select list of 
good things (many, too, that ought to be there). 
* I grant that ‘‘Argus”* would find the registration an insuperable one. I 
- know how laborious a work it is to enumerate the ever-increasing “‘ novel- 
ties’ in Odontoglossums alone, to say nothing of recording the introductions 
of the Hybridist in Cattleya, Lelia, and allied genera; but up to the present 
I think I have not found it too great a task. My great want is that, when I 
am at the Drill Hall, the majority of my labours and material are at Rose- 
field. Were all this done at a ‘‘ Central Institution ” all the material would 
be at once available, and all genera being treated alike, the mass of -infor- 
mation would be of infinite value. Being but a specialist myself I cannot 
undertake what I know nothing about, and thus, two of the great orders, 
Cypripedium and Dendrobium, are to me only dim, misty matters. I do. 
not for a moment suggest that to a great many others they are not as 
clear as daylight, but they have not their materials at hand more than I 
have. We all need the’ same things with us, viz., the result of our 
researches. . 
Regarding my ‘‘ Monograph of Odontoglossum crispum,” which ‘‘ Argus”’ 
refers to as my promised list, it was after long consideration abandoned, 
for I found that some people considered too much information would 
be therein contained, and as I did not intend to present it all over 
the Orchid World, I did not care to undertake a certain loss. A list of 
names and bare details, such as is contained ina Certificate list, would 
hardly meet the case to my satisfaction, but my compilations are a great aid 
to myself and friends. 
Ido not enumerate the new varieties of Cattleya Trianz, therefore 
cannot reply to “‘ Argus’s”’ question. I should, however, think the list he 
