48 THE ORCHID REVIEW. 
collection of M. F. Finet, is descended from S. X cardinale ? and S. 
caudatum ¢. Two other Lelio-cattleyas were described in these pages— 
namely, L.-c. X Trentonensis (L.-c. elegans @ x L. pumila ¢), from the 
collection of the Hon. C. G. Roebling, and L.-c. x Andreana (C. bicolor? 
Xx L.-c. x elegans), from the collection of M. Fournier, of Marseilles. i 
Several Cypripediums have also been recorded from private collections 
during the year, and glancing back through our pages we note the following : 
C. xX Henry Graves (C. Lawrenceanum 9 xX C. X Marshallianum ¢), 
from the collection of H. Graves, Esq.; C. X Louise (possibly derived 
from C. x Leenaum and C. x Ashburtoniz), from R. le Doux, Esq.; C. 
x St. Hilda (Boxallii ¢ x Curtisii g), C. x conco-callosum and C. X 
calloso-niveum, from R. H. Measures, Esq.; C. X Hurrellianum (Argus ? 
x Curtisii 3), from C. G. Roebling, Esq. ; C. X Rossianum (derived from 
C. barbatum and C. tonsum), from H. J. Ross, Esq.; C. X Vannere (C. 
Curtisii ¢ x C. x selligerum majus g), from W. Vanner, Esq.; C. X 
Atropos (C. xX Ashburtone expansum @ X C. purpuratum ¢), from 
Reginald Young, Esq.; and others. C. x Mabelize var. Lord Derby, 
which flowered in the collection of T. Statter, Esq., is the finest of the 
hybrids derived from C. superbiens @ and C. Rothschildianum 3. 
The foregoing are among the principal novelties of the year. A few 
may have been overlooked in this rapid survey, but others, which are known 
to be either synonyms or varieties of existing forms, have been purposely 
omitted, both among species and hybrids. Synonymous names are in- 
creasing far too rapidly. 
++ 
EPIPHRONITIS x VEITCHII. 
A FOUR-FLOWERED inflorescence of this handsome little plant has been 
sent by Messrs. James Veitch & Sons. Its history was given in our first 
volume (pp. 116, 2gr), but we may again allude to the remarkable way in 
which the character of the mother plant has been lost. It was obtained by 
crossing Sophronitis grandiflora with the pollen of Epidendrum radicans, 
the latter as many feet high as the former is inches, yet the influence of the 
Sophronitis is only apparent in the much dwarfed habit of the hybrid 
offspring. The structure of the flower is precisely that of Epidendrum 
tadicans, enlarged to 1} inches diameter across the petals, and the colour 
darker, almost crimson in shade. No one would have guessed its origin. 
It received a First-class Certificate from the Royal Horticultural Society on 
June 24th, 1890. We should like to see what would be the effect of 
reversing the cross, as well as of again crossing the Sophronitis with pollen 
of the present hybrid. The result in either case would certainly be 
interesting. 
