June, 1907.] THE ORCHID REVIEW. 183 
funambulum, and one called O. c. Calos, which is said not to be the original 
ofthat name. The fifth of the group, O. c. Aramie, was not represented. 
One is tempted to say more about such a fine series, but space does not 
permit. Like a collection of paintings, they can be referred to when the 
plants are not in flower, and if they compare unfavourably with paintings 
as regards colour, they are often superior in some other respects. And 
what would one not give to be able to consult the originals from which 
some of our paintings were made ! 
Mr. Crawshay is, of course, preserving flowers of his hybrid seedlings as 
they flower, and judging by the number of plants approaching that stage 
he will be kept busy for some time to come. Some of the crosses made 
should throw further light on what is occurring in nature, and we hope that 
Mr. Crawshay will succeed in adding some forms of sterling merit to his 
collection, and also preserve flowers of those that are of less horticultural 
interest. He has already made a good beginning, and the results are now 
likely to accumulate rapidly. Evidence is particularly desirable of the 
amount of variation between the seedlings out of the same capsule, and Mr. 
Crawshay is following the question up with praiseworthy energy, aided by a 
good assistant in the person of Mr. Stables. We hope to see the results in 
due time. 
CYPRIPEDIUM HIRSUTUM. 
Tue beautiful North American species generally known as Cypripedium 
pubescens and C. parviflorum are again making a fine show in vur gardens, 
and as the names are sometimes confused I have been asked to point out 
the difference between them. Generally speaking C. pubescens has a much 
larger flower than the other, the sepals and petals often lighter in colour, 
and the lip somewhat compressed laterally, but nearly all the books agree 
that they intergrade, and both forms are now flowering at Kew out of the 
same batch of roots. Several times I have tried to discover some essential 
difference, both with living and dried specimens, and now some further 
evidence has appeared. 
About a year ago a note on the subject appeared in Rhodora (viii. p. 93), 
by Ora W. Knight, Bangor, Maine. The writer has long doubted their 
specific distinctness, and now publishes his conclusions on the subject. In 
May, rgor, a clump of the large-flowered form was found growing in very 
rich soil, in low shady woods, by Mr. F. M. Billings, who transplanted part 
of it into poorer soil, in a sunnier spot, in his garden, and in 1905 the 
characters were so far changed as to pass for the smaller-flowered C. parvi- 
florum. The writer, on the contrary, has annually transplanted some 
C. parviflorum from a cold bog into very rich soil in his own garden, and 
those that have been there longest now present the characters of 
