238 THE ORCHID REVIEW. 
was guided by the colour in assessing the value, a white lip being very rare 
on a blotched crispum. 
Mr. John Cowan, manager of John Cowan & Co., Gateacre, said that 
he had been over twenty years in the Orchid trade, and had had a very large 
number of Orchids through his hands. A plant of the size of the one 
produced, if it flowered true to the picture, would be very cheap at 150 
guineas, and a very small plant at 100 guineas. It was not a fancy price, and 
if the plant could be found he could get £200 for it. It would be worth 
£150 out of flower if one could be certain that the painting was true. 
Mr. Richard Ferguson, a florist at Blackburn, said that he was with Mr. 
Rutherford when these Orchids came, and untilthe Rambouillet flowered. 
He assisted in unpacking them, and saw the defendants’ labels attached to 
the plants on their arrival. He also agreed with what Mr. Lupton had 
stated with respect to making out the ivorine label and making the entry in 
the book. It was his duty to assist Mr. Lupton, and he swore that the 
plant that bloomed was the actual one that was unpacked. Its value as it 
bloomed would be £5 or £6. He was with Mr. Rutherford four years, and 
‘Orchids would arrive three or four times a year. 
Mr. Edward Valentine Low, of Hugh Low & Co., Enfield, stated that 
he had had a very large experience in Orchids. He had seen the print of 
this Rambouillet, and a plant of that size would certainly be worth £150. 
There are now six bulbs, and the plant would be divisible into two, worth 
‘probably roo guineas each. 
Mr. de Barri Crawshay, Rosefield, Sevenoaks, had had 274 years’ 
experience as an amateur of Orchids. He had seen the plant in question, 
and agreed that there were six live bulbs and evidence of four dead ones. 
Its value, if it were certain to flower according to that design, would be 150 
guineas. He based his estimate on the many others he had seen sold at 
relative prices. 
This concluded the plantiff’s case, and the Court adjourned for the day. 
Mr. Glasgow, in opening the case for the defendants, stated that there 
‘was no allegation that the plaintiff had acted in bad faith, but that he or his 
servants had made a mistake. The whole question turned on the identity 
of the plant. His case was that that was not the plant which was packed, 
which had four bulbs and a growth. 
Mr. Ernest Haumont, in the defendants’ service, stated that he 
recollected some Orchids being sent to Mr. Rutherford in November, 1897- 
He sorted them, saw their names put on the labels, and remained in the 
‘shed until they were packed and the box closed and addressed, after which 
it was sent to the station. The Rambouillet had four bulbs and a growth. 
It was a division of a plant which had flowered four times, in 1893, 1894, 
1895, and 1896. He had seen this plant, but did not recognize it. The 
