THE BIOLOGICAL REVIEW. 41 



LIPARIS LCESELII RICHARD. 



Liparis Iceselii Richard. P.L. 10084. — Plate I. 



Syn. Ophrys Iceselii Linn. Sp. PI. 1341. With. Bot. 

 Arr. 988. 



0. lilifolia Relh. Cantab. 537. Huds. Fl. An. 390. 



Pseudo-Orchis bifolia palustris. Raii Syn. 382. 



I found one specimen of this orchid on July 11, 1891, growing 

 in a moist, mossy situation, facing the south on Scarboro 

 Heights. There was only the one specimen to be seen, and it 

 was near the top of the hillside ; the soil was sandy, of a 

 springy nature, and well shaded. Plant 8' high ; leaves respec- 

 tively 5' and 4-I' long, by if and 1^' wide ; it had eleven 

 flowers ; pedicels average 3", and lip 2" long ; scape 5^' high ; 

 the previous year's bulb was still green and solid at the side of 

 the present stem. 



Macoun's Cat. of Can. Plants quotes it as having been found 

 in Ontario, near Ottawa, Belleville, London, Oak Hills and 

 Campbellford, all in swamps and bogs. 



Speaking of this plant, James Sowerby, F.L.S., in his 

 English Botany, Vol. III., 1794, says : 



" Ray has mentioned this plant as the production of some 

 moors in the neighbourhood of Cambridge ; but those moors 

 were long searched for it in vain by succeeding botanists, till 

 the Rev. Mr. Relhan discovered it a few years ago growing, not 

 very sparingly, where Ray has reported. This gentleman 

 attributes its remaining so long latent, to its usual situation 

 close to the stems of rushes. 



" Mr. Pitchford many years ago found, in a meadow at St. 

 Faith's, near Norwich, one single specimen, which he afterwards 

 presented to the Rev. Mr. Lightfoot. 



A confusion, which originated with Linnaeus, has long existed 

 between this plant and his Ophrys lilifolia. We can assure the 

 public, on the authority of his herbarium, that the latter is only 

 found in America, and that the European synonyms, which he 

 has in several parts of his works applied to that species, really 

 belong to ours." 



Bentham and Hooker, in their British Flora, 1887, gi ye its 



