(Fepsruary, 1906. THE ORCHID REVIEW. 
LAELIA RUBESCENS. . 
Laia rubescens is not commonly met with in cultivation at the present 
time, but a good plant of it is “shown in the annexed illustration, 
which is reproduced from a photograph sent by Mr. H. Haddon, gardener 
to J. J. Neale, Esq., of Penarth. It was taken by one of Mr. Neale’s sons 
a yearago, when the plant bore eight spikes and an aggregate of about 
thirty-six flowers. This year the plant has nine spikes. 
been known for upwards of six 
The species has 
years, being originally described by Dr. 
Lindley, in 1840 (Bot. Reg., xxvi., t. 41), from a plant which flowered in 
the collection of George Barker, Esq., of Birmingham. It had been 
obtained from Mr. Knight, of Chelsea, without any clue to its origin. 
In 
Fig 5. LLIA RUBESCENS. 
the following year Lelia acuminata was described by Lindley (I.c., xxvii., 
Misc., p. 17, t. 24), from plants which flowered at Chiswick, and in the 
collection of Sir Charles Lemon, at Carclew. It was sent from Guatemala’ 
by Hartweg, who found it at Retatulen, growing on the stem of the 
Calabash tree (Cresentia Cujete). This tree, by the way, forms a favourite 
haunt of Orchids, and it is on record that at one time its branches were not 
infrequently sent to England from the West Indies for the sake of the 
epiphytes with which they were infested. In 1842 a third species was 
described by Lindley, under the name of Lelia peduncularis (Bot. Reg., 
xxviii., Misc., p. 10), from a plant which flowered in the collection of 
George Barker, Esq., and it was afterwards figured (/.c., xxxi., t. 69).. Its 
