322 THE ORCHID REVIEW. [ NOVEMBER, 1906. 
recorded. These details are given to show the methodical way in which Mr. 
Young’s records were kept, and we must now pass on to give some details 
of the work itself. 
Mr. Young's first recorded cross appears to have been made in 1889, 
and was C. Haynaldianum ? X Spicerianum ¢. The seed was sown on 
the pot of the former, and three seedlings appeared, which were duly 
referred to C. X Carnusianum. The date is not recorded, nor yet that of 
the second cross, which was C. villosum x barbatum Warneri, and 
yielded eighteen seedlings, but the third cross, C. superbiens x Godefroye, 
is recorded as made in May, 188g, the result being two seedlings, which 
subsequently died. The next five crosses gave no result, but the succeeding 
one, C. insigne punctato-violacsum X_ vexillarium, produced C. X 
Dedalus, Mr. Young’s first novelty, which flowered in October, 1898 (See 
O.R. vi. p. 360). From the fourth cross onward the date of sowing the 
seed (if any) is regularly recorded, and we find ten sowings in 1891, and 
thirty-three in 1892, but only nineteen of them yielded seedlings. In 
January, 1892, Mr. Young commenced to record the date of hybridising, 
and this was continued regularly down to March 13th, 1906, when five 
crosses were made, the last entry being “ x Pitcherianum magnificum X 
Rothschildianum.” The aggregate number of crosses recorded is 1915. 
It would take some time to ascertain the proportion of failures, but a 
rough estimate can be given, because Mr. Young added an “O” in red 
ink, in front of the record, to indicate no result, and a similar “X” © 
indicate success, while the two signs were combined if seedlings were obtained 
but afterwards died. This item is complete down to February, 1897. Down 
to this period 624 crosses had been made, of which 148 had yielded seedlings; 
but as these died in 23 cases there remained 125 -successes, being a Plo 
portion of almost exactly four-fifths failures. Of course, a good many 
difficult crosses were attempted, and repeated, and the various causes of 
failure will be understood, but we note a large number of cases where the 
seeds are recorded as “ Very good” and “Splendid,” yet no seedlings were 
obtained. 
It is obviously impossible to go into details as to the nature of the 
crosses made. Mr. Young seems to have attempted most of those 
were available from time to time, and the list includes many combinations 
from which good results might have been expected. Naturally, a 8° 
many of his successes had already been anticipated, and in these cases he 
was always able to trace the name from his copious records of the work ° 
others, adding a varietal name whenever he thought the merits’ of the 
demanded. 
: ; ; 0 
His own novelties are specially indicated, and it may be interesting . 
give a list of them, with their parents. 
